HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Jets 2012-2013 lineup

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-18-2012, 02:58 PM
  #426
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerzy View Post
I am still holding some hope here for a signing in the form of Brad Boyes (yes, I think he can easily bounce back into form. Hello, Kyle Wellwood) or Jiri Hudler (if Detroit doesn't re-sign him within the next week.)

I honestly think if 3/4 or more of the same team returns, which is realistically likely, with an addition or two to help with some offense, that the team will be in better form. No relocation or adjustment to a new city, second year under the coaching staff and one of the most important notes is they all know what the expectations are.

I'll be excited if we can sign a potential scorer, 50-60 point forward in Boyes or Hudler. If we do that, I think we improve, and if we improve by a bit we very well may be a playoff team. Neither are the most flashy of signings, but at this point in time the market may dictate how active we are and can be. And remember, this is all a process and will not happen over night.


Ladd - Little - Wheeler
Kane - Antropov - Boyes/Hudler
Burmistrov - Slater - Wellwood (this line would actually provide reliable defence and a spark of offense).
Glass (UFA) - Cormier - Thorburn
Miettinen/Machecek

give or take.. in terms of the forward line-up, very well could improve on last season, for a number of key reasons, I think.
I agree, and i'd love to try and get one of the two.

The point i'm trying to make is that we will have to be extraordinarily lucky just to sign either of these two (Boys/hudler) given that theirs essentially double the amount of teams looking for top 6 talent, as their are players available.

I totally agree that Chevy better kick tires (with a crop this thin it would be a good idea to kick every tire).

Unfortunately I think a lot will have to go right for us to land even one of these players, and that, like most other teams, we're more likely to be left out in the cold then to come home with a top 6 forward.

As i've said before, I 100% expect Chevy to attempt to sign a top 6 forward this off season, but I'm far less certain he will be successful due simply to the numbers (players available, not salary).

Grind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:11 PM
  #427
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
I agree, and i'd love to try and get one of the two.

The point i'm trying to make is that we will have to be extraordinarily lucky just to sign either of these two (Boys/hudler) given that theirs essentially double the amount of teams looking for top 6 talent, as their are players available.

I totally agree that Chevy better kick tires (with a crop this thin it would be a good idea to kick every tire).

Unfortunately I think a lot will have to go right for us to land even one of these players, and that, like most other teams, we're more likely to be left out in the cold then to come home with a top 6 forward.

As i've said before, I 100% expect Chevy to attempt to sign a top 6 forward this off season, but I'm far less certain he will be successful due simply to the numbers (players available, not salary).
Lucky to get BRAD BOYES? Seriously. I will feel unlucky if we sign him...he should be a "aw **** we missed out on everybody half decent" type option. Boyes 14, 17 and 8 goals, in two different systems where he was given EVERY opportunity to succeed. The last season where he was decent was 08-09 when he got 33g, 72pts to lead the Blues...and finished a TEAM WORST -20. I have exactly ZERO interest in Boyes.

I'd rather bring back Wellwood to be a top 6 player, he is a better top 6 than Boyes (and Wellwood should clearly NOT be in a top 6 for any team)

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:13 PM
  #428
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 13,551
vCash: 500
I really don't want Boyes. He's a shadow of the player he used to be. He scored 43 goals, then 33 goals and since then hasn't even come close to 20. I'd rather keep Fehr to be honest.

Hudler I like though. I think he'd be a good #2 C.

WJG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:20 PM
  #429
BigTuna49
#WPGWHITEOUT
 
BigTuna49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ATL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 24,473
vCash: 84
Boyes might work. I'd rather it only be something like a 2-year deal though(don't care about the price if that would be the case). He could slot in somewhere in the middle 6 and get anywhere from 14-16 minutes a game. If anything it would give us a little better depth. It would also allow for guys like Cormier and Machacek to ease into the NHL instead of being relied on too much.

Boyes' production has been somewhat based on how much ice time he gets as well. His 72 point season he was getting over 19 minutes a game. When he put up 55 point he was playing 17 minutes a game. And last year when he put up a weak 23 points, he was only playing 13 minutes a game.

But you do have to be careful with a guy like this because we do not need another Mittens of Fehr next year or we might be on the outside looking in again.

BigTuna49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:22 PM
  #430
Guerzy
HFBoards Contributor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,267
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by YWGinYYZ View Post
Frugy: the Burmi - Slater - Wellwood line is interesting. I actually think that could be a good 3rd line, with one exception - this could be a great shutdown line (Burmi and Slater), that can score (I think Slater is underrated personally) 25-45pts each, but Welly's a bit out of his element in a shut down role. What do you see the 3rd and 4th lines being, in terms of responsibilities? Split duty for shutdown roles, with the 3rd getting more offensive zone ice-time?
Shutdown roles and lines can be somewhat overrated at times, in my opinion. I mean really, I love Slater, but do we really expect Tanner Glass and Chris Thorburn to go out and shut down Stamkos and St. Louis? Just roll a solid, well balanced 4-line forward group and implement defensive responsibilities on all of them. Easier said than done, yes, but possible. Let them have roles and responsibilities, buy into the system, play as a cohesive unit, form an identity, etc.

Myself, in terms of responsibilities I would expect the 3rd line of Burmistrov - Slater - Wellwood to give us quality minutes (12-15), reliable defensive play and chip in on offense. A nice two-way line that can compliment the top 2 heavy offensive lines.

As for Glass - Cormier - Thorburn, they're going to get 5-10 minutes to provide energy, give the top 2-3 lines a break, overall just provide us with quality minutes and bring some energy.

Guerzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:24 PM
  #431
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,917
vCash: 50
At some point if the UFA we are signing is only marginally better than one of our younger guys, is there more value in giving the time to your younger guy?

I don't think Machacek is going to continue at anywhere near his pace, but at what point do you just go with him on the 3rd if there is nothing out there?

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:29 PM
  #432
Guerzy
HFBoards Contributor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,267
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke49 View Post
Boyes might work. I'd rather it only be something like a 2-year deal though(don't care about the price if that would be the case). He could slot in somewhere in the middle 6 and get anywhere from 14-16 minutes a game. If anything it would give us a little better depth. It would also allow for guys like Cormier and Machacek to ease into the NHL instead of being relied on too much.

Boyes' production has been somewhat based on how much ice time he gets as well. His 72 point season he was getting over 19 minutes a game. When he put up 55 point he was playing 17 minutes a game. And last year when he put up a weak 23 points, he was only playing 13 minutes a game.

But you do have to be careful with a guy like this because we do not need another Mittens of Fehr next year or we might be on the outside looking in again.
Nice post, Duke. Also in regards to Boyes, in those years he put up solid numbers, he averaged 3-4+ minutes a game on the PP. He still had solid and respectable numbers at both even strength and the PP, which is good.

I'm not 100% sold on him, but I certainly think he's worth a shot. His price will likely be reasonable. He's got a nice skillset there, I think if we put him in a top 6 offensive role with PP minutes it could be a nice fit.

If we ignore last season for a second given is wasn't the normal at all for Boyes, his offensive out put has been solid, albeit inconsistent, but still respectable. Points wise, he's hit 69, 46, 65, 72, 42 and 55 before last season. That's not too bad at all, really. If he can land somewhere in between there and provide us with a right-handed shot from the RW, be a threat on the PP and help boost our scoring in the top 6, perhaps 50-55 points, we'd be better off, I think.

And by all indications he is a player who carries himself well both on and off the ice given his achievements throughout his junior years leading him into the NHL. 1999-00 OHL - Bobby Smith Trophy (Scholastic Player of the Year), 1999-00 Canadian Major Junior - Scholastic Player of the Year, 2000-01 OHL - William Hanley Trophy (Most Gentlemanly Player), 2000-01 OHL - Red Tilson Trophy (Most Oustanding Player), 2001-02 OHL - Wayne Gretzky Trophy (Playoff MVP), 2001-02 OHL - William Hanley Trophy (Most Gentlemanly Player), 2001-02 OHL - Red Tilson Trophy (Most Oustanding Player), 2001-02 Canadian Major Junior - Sportsmanlike Player of the Year, 2002-03 AHL - All-Rookie Team and 2005-06 NHL - All-Rookie Team.

TNSE look for quality individuals, and I think Boyes me be just that. He's got a nice background there, and may fit in with the model TSNE likes. If Boyes could ever put it all together and find a home and some consistency, he could be a nice fit for a team like us, I think.

All in all, I think he has some good years in him yet, he's just got to find a good spot/fit and home to put down some roots. Maybe he finds that, maybe he doesn't.


Last edited by Guerzy: 06-18-2012 at 03:44 PM.
Guerzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:34 PM
  #433
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
At some point if the UFA we are signing is only marginally better than one of our younger guys, is there more value in giving the time to your younger guy?

I don't think Machacek is going to continue at anywhere near his pace, but at what point do you just go with him on the 3rd if there is nothing out there?
I will be upset if we sign a mittens type player and he wins out over Machacek in camp/preseason due to numbers (ala mclean vs cormier last fall). I think Machacek deserves a real good shake, i don't expect him to keep it up at all but, yes, he's earned his shot and i would almost even say spot and this is based off of production not including points.

+8, 24 hits in 13 games, 4 tka to 1 gva, clearly safe enough to be on your 4th (or even 3rd) line

Grind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 03:41 PM
  #434
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
Lucky to get BRAD BOYES? Seriously. I will feel unlucky if we sign him...he should be a "aw **** we missed out on everybody half decent" type option. Boyes 14, 17 and 8 goals, in two different systems where he was given EVERY opportunity to succeed. The last season where he was decent was 08-09 when he got 33g, 72pts to lead the Blues...and finished a TEAM WORST -20. I have exactly ZERO interest in Boyes.

I'd rather bring back Wellwood to be a top 6 player, he is a better top 6 than Boyes (and Wellwood should clearly NOT be in a top 6 for any team)
I stand by my statement, we will not be the only team after him.

Take a look at free agency, he IS the half decent option.

The point i'm trying to make is that "everybody half decent" includes 5-6 players.

with 20+ teams looking for top 6 help, you do the math, even if all things were to be considered equal, that gives us what, a 25% chance at best of signing someone "half decent", if we go after every single one of them.

I think he could be great wellwood esq reclamaition project. But more importantly, my point is, this years F/A benchmark of "half decent" is pretty low.

Grind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 04:00 PM
  #435
Guerzy
HFBoards Contributor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,267
vCash: 50
He's certainly got his question marks, my main point in all of the Boyes talk has been if we can get him on a reasonable 1-2 year deal, I think he'd be worth a shot.

He's not perfect, he's got his flaws as all and many players do, but I think we could potentially be of fit for him and there is a chance we get some quality production from him from the RW.

Guerzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 04:06 PM
  #436
Holden Caulfield
Global Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke49 View Post
Boyes might work. I'd rather it only be something like a 2-year deal though(don't care about the price if that would be the case). He could slot in somewhere in the middle 6 and get anywhere from 14-16 minutes a game. If anything it would give us a little better depth. It would also allow for guys like Cormier and Machacek to ease into the NHL instead of being relied on too much.

Boyes' production has been somewhat based on how much ice time he gets as well. His 72 point season he was getting over 19 minutes a game. When he put up 55 point he was playing 17 minutes a game. And last year when he put up a weak 23 points, he was only playing 13 minutes a game.

But you do have to be careful with a guy like this because we do not need another Mittens of Fehr next year or we might be on the outside looking in again.
My big question mark revolves around, WHY did his minutes fall. He was a key player on a STL team, but suddenly saw his minutes evaporate. So he was dealt to Buffalo for a 2nd rounder where they planned to make him a key player. And again he saw his minutes just disappear. Why is that? Did his production fall because his minutes went down or did his minutes go down because his production fell. I tend to subscribe to the later theory, clearly not everyone agrees, but it's what I feel

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
I stand by my statement, we will not be the only team after him.

Take a look at free agency, he IS the half decent option.

The point i'm trying to make is that "everybody half decent" includes 5-6 players.

with 20+ teams looking for top 6 help, you do the math, even if all things were to be considered equal, that gives us what, a 25% chance at best of signing someone "half decent", if we go after every single one of them.

I think he could be great wellwood esq reclamaition project. But more importantly, my point is, this years F/A benchmark of "half decent" is pretty low.
I did take a look at free agency. I see much better players (Parise, Semin, Jokinen, Doan, A. Kostitsyn, Whitney, Smyth, Huselius, Jagr, Stoll, Hudler, Selanne, Parenteau), guys I'd rather have as "reclamation projects" (Penner, Stempniak, Ponikarovsky, Moss, Parse) and plenty of veterans that can still fill a role (Rolston, Hecht, Gaustad, Moen, McClement, Fedotenko, Mitchell, Tootoo, Burish, Pyatt, Winnik, Petrell). Many of these don't fit into what you are looking for since they will not come to Winnipeg or not potential top 6 guys, but I think that there is lots of value to be had without overpaying for a Boyes type. I have no doubt plenty of teams will look at Boyes, and I have no doubt that some team will overpay for him, which is WHY I don't want to look at him. At 1-2 million maybe take a chance on Boyes (although I still would rather have Machacek/Burmistrov get a chance)...at he 3+ over multiple years he is likely to get, stay well away.

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 04:21 PM
  #437
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Boyes seems to be the classic one-dimension player to me - the pp shooter - while with St Louis.

When not producing in that role, he's not contributing much else - which likely means his minutes drop and his production too.

Bob E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 04:22 PM
  #438
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post


I did take a look at free agency. I see much better players (Parise, Semin,

Jokinen, Doan, A. Kostitsyn, Whitney, Smyth, Huselius, Jagr, Stoll, Hudler, Selanne, Parenteau),

guys I'd rather have as "reclamation projects"

(Penner, Stempniak, Ponikarovsky, Moss, Parse) and plenty of veterans that can still fill a role (Rolston, Hecht, Gaustad, Moen, McClement, Fedotenko, Mitchell, Tootoo, Burish, Pyatt, Winnik, Petrell). Many of these don't fit into what you are looking for since they will not come to Winnipeg or not potential top 6 guys, but I think that there is lots of value to be had without overpaying for a Boyes type. I have no doubt plenty of teams will look at Boyes, and I have no doubt that some team will overpay for him, which is WHY I don't want to look at him. At 1-2 million maybe take a chance on Boyes (although I still would rather have Machacek/Burmistrov get a chance)...at he 3+ over multiple years he is likely to get, stay well away.
That's fair, i think I was getting the wrong impression from you ( i think i was mistakenly getting "if we sign brad boyes were not trying hard enough")

To be honest i think we are most likely to end up with nothing but a couple older roleplayers that have no business in a teams top 6.

All I"m saying is, the chances are slim the jets manage to plug that top 6 hole in F/A, and if they went that route, Boyes is likely as good as they'll get. It's not necessarily a good idea, and for over 3 mil a genuinely bad one I won't disagree.

If you don't want to sign a top 6 free agent, that's fine, you probably won't be upset this offseason.

My logic and posting was meant to temper the ambitions of those that need to see a boatload of talent come in via F/A to avoid the "wahh chevies sitting on his hands, he didn't sign anyone of note," posting that will undoubtedly come along.

For example, Wellwood, who would fit into the "half decent" bunch in free agency this season, is a player Chevy signed last year while he was "doing nothing" by some posters logic.

Grind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 04:42 PM
  #439
Guerzy
HFBoards Contributor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,267
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
Boyes seems to be the classic one-dimension player to me - the pp shooter - while with St Louis.

When not producing in that role, he's not contributing much else - which likely means his minutes drop and his production too.
That's a bit incorrect, though. He had pretty solid even strength points to go along with his PP points.

In his first full season in St. Louis, out of his 43 goals just 11 were on the PP, 0 shorthanded, leaving 32 even strength goals.

In his second season in St. Louis, out of his 33 goals, 16 were on the PP, 17 were even strength goals.

Lastly, I don't want it to look or appear as if I am trying to sell anyone on Boyes, I'm not. He may end up being a poor signing for whoever signs him. As Holden said, I would only want to take the chance on Boyes if he were to come at a reasonable and cheap contract. I wouldn't throw too much money or years at him, that wouldn't be wise.

Guerzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 05:11 PM
  #440
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 13,551
vCash: 500
I wouldn't mind taking a chance on Ryan Smyth to play on our 3rd line.

WJG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 05:11 PM
  #441
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerzy View Post
That's a bit incorrect, though. He had pretty solid even strength points to go along with his PP points.

In his first full season in St. Louis, out of his 43 goals just 11 were on the PP, 0 shorthanded, leaving 32 even strength goals.

In his second season in St. Louis, out of his 33 goals, 16 were on the PP, 17 were even strength goals.

Lastly, I don't want it to look or appear as if I am trying to sell anyone on Boyes, I'm not. He may end up being a poor signing for whoever signs him. As Holden said, I would only want to take the chance on Boyes if he were to come at a reasonable and cheap contract. I wouldn't throw too much money or years at him, that wouldn't be wise.
I guess I'm remembering his 16 goal season - and 1/2 your goals on the pp, does say PP shooter to me.

Didn't seem to score too much on pp after that, and his goal totals overall dropped significantly.

Reminds me of andrew mcbain when with the pittsburgh penguins. He got pp goals/pts playing with hawerchuck, but after his trade to the penguins, he didn't play the rh off-side wing there on pp. Some lemieux guy did. Mcbain didn't have much success after that. Likely lots of reasons, but sure doesn't hurt to get pp minutes and points if your looking for a FA contract.

Bob E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2012, 06:07 PM
  #442
Makeshift We Are
Harper is a fool.
 
Makeshift We Are's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Winnipeg,MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJG View Post
I wouldn't mind taking a chance on Ryan Smyth to play on our 3rd line.
I'd die...

Smitty has been my favourite player since I can remember. He got me into hockey.

Makeshift We Are is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2012, 01:40 AM
  #443
voyageur
Registered lunatic
 
voyageur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: negotiable
Country: Canada
Posts: 897
vCash: 500
I still think our biggest priority is a 2nd line centre, Antropov is past his prime, and better suited as a winger, Burmistrov hasn't reached his yet, and may have been negatively affected in his development by being rushed to the show. Scheifle could be 2 or 3 years away. The Enstrom trade talk has me interested. Not sure if he is going to be a long-term Winnipeg Jet. To be honest the Jets didn't fare badly without him last year when injured, especially considering the brutal road trip of November. He seems to me like the best asset we have to leverage the needed #2 pivot. Without Lidstrom and Stuart I have to believe Detroit would have some interest. Perhaps we could get Filppula and a 2nd back for him? Maybe Dubinsky+ from the Rangers? From the Canucks? Could we get Raymond, not a center, but him and Kane flying off the wings could get the fans out of their seats, and a good prospect (Tanev) or draft pick.

I absolutely want no part of Brad Boyes, he lacks the versatility of Wellwood, who is underrated defensive player and capable faceoff man. I would not want to see Boyes push Machacek who I think should get an audition as a 2nd line winger with former Giant teammate Kane down the depth chart. Resign Welly, resign Glass, who is a classy guy, and a good role player (in my estimation Thorburn was the weakest link of the GST).

Ladd-Little-Wheeler lack true 1st line talent, but not work ethic. Kane- Filppula-Antropov would be an intriguing 2nd line, Machacek could push Antropov out, Welly too. Glass-Slater-Wellwood makes a decent 3rd line, solid defensively, Wellwood gives the line some offensive acumen. Maybe add a talented line of Burmistrov-Cormier-Machacek, who could all score big goals and add some youthful enthusiasm. Given our lack of top line dominance, it would definitely be expedient I think to be a consistent 4 line team next year.Maxwell has proven himself to be a good utility player in my opinion. He should compete with Gagnon for the final roster spot. Thorburn gets a reduced role if we are serious challengers for the playoffs. He is a good team player, fearless, but struggles often to make simple plays, I find him too slow to be an effective checking line forechecker, but definitely think he could help us still. Can we trade Miettenen please? A good GM fixes his errors, Miettenen, and the Eric Fehr trade are two stop gap decisions that hindered the team IMO, by taking away roster spots from capable players such as Machacek and Maxwell.

Defensively I don't think Hainsey-Bogosian, Stuart-Byfuglien is a bad top 4, other than the fact they are all American (just jokes Hockey USA is producing a lot of good defensemen,so it's no surprise). Wouldn't mind seeing Kulda paired with either Meech or Flood, as a final pairing, and some good internal competition. Clitsome and Postma could also battle for playing time... True North has some interesting decisions to make. With Bogosian and Wheeler, not to mention Burmistrov, needing their contracts renewed next year, Enstrom Hainsey, and Antropov going towards UFA status, it is important to establish a nucleus to build around, and to maintain a good prospect pool to replace players destined to walk. I think Enstrom's minutes could be filled by Hainsey, with Bogosian taking the PP time. A kid like Postma gets a chance too by moving a similar type of player out. Our d could be a little thin with injuries, unless Melchiori or Redmond mature quickly, but unless we want to overpay, or fill a 2nd line hole with another stop gap or reclamation project, I think it would be prudent to seek a centre, for one of our defensive assets, allowing Chevy to continue building from within (the Nashville model).

voyageur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2012, 08:56 AM
  #444
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by voyageur View Post
I still think our biggest priority is a 2nd line centre, Antropov is past his prime, and better suited as a winger, Burmistrov hasn't reached his yet, and may have been negatively affected in his development by being rushed to the show. Scheifle could be 2 or 3 years away. The Enstrom trade talk has me interested. Not sure if he is going to be a long-term Winnipeg Jet. To be honest the Jets didn't fare badly without him last year when injured, especially considering the brutal road trip of November. He seems to me like the best asset we have to leverage the needed #2 pivot. Without Lidstrom and Stuart I have to believe Detroit would have some interest. Perhaps we could get Filppula and a 2nd back for him? Maybe Dubinsky+ from the Rangers? From the Canucks? Could we get Raymond, not a center, but him and Kane flying off the wings could get the fans out of their seats, and a good prospect (Tanev) or draft pick.

I absolutely want no part of Brad Boyes, he lacks the versatility of Wellwood, who is underrated defensive player and capable faceoff man. I would not want to see Boyes push Machacek who I think should get an audition as a 2nd line winger with former Giant teammate Kane down the depth chart. Resign Welly, resign Glass, who is a classy guy, and a good role player (in my estimation Thorburn was the weakest link of the GST).

Ladd-Little-Wheeler lack true 1st line talent, but not work ethic. Kane- Filppula-Antropov would be an intriguing 2nd line, Machacek could push Antropov out, Welly too. Glass-Slater-Wellwood makes a decent 3rd line, solid defensively, Wellwood gives the line some offensive acumen. Maybe add a talented line of Burmistrov-Cormier-Machacek, who could all score big goals and add some youthful enthusiasm. Given our lack of top line dominance, it would definitely be expedient I think to be a consistent 4 line team next year.Maxwell has proven himself to be a good utility player in my opinion. He should compete with Gagnon for the final roster spot. Thorburn gets a reduced role if we are serious challengers for the playoffs. He is a good team player, fearless, but struggles often to make simple plays, I find him too slow to be an effective checking line forechecker, but definitely think he could help us still. Can we trade Miettenen please? A good GM fixes his errors, Miettenen, and the Eric Fehr trade are two stop gap decisions that hindered the team IMO, by taking away roster spots from capable players such as Machacek and Maxwell.

Defensively I don't think Hainsey-Bogosian, Stuart-Byfuglien is a bad top 4, other than the fact they are all American (just jokes Hockey USA is producing a lot of good defensemen,so it's no surprise). Wouldn't mind seeing Kulda paired with either Meech or Flood, as a final pairing, and some good internal competition. Clitsome and Postma could also battle for playing time... True North has some interesting decisions to make. With Bogosian and Wheeler, not to mention Burmistrov, needing their contracts renewed next year, Enstrom Hainsey, and Antropov going towards UFA status, it is important to establish a nucleus to build around, and to maintain a good prospect pool to replace players destined to walk. I think Enstrom's minutes could be filled by Hainsey, with Bogosian taking the PP time. A kid like Postma gets a chance too by moving a similar type of player out. Our d could be a little thin with injuries, unless Melchiori or Redmond mature quickly, but unless we want to overpay, or fill a 2nd line hole with another stop gap or reclamation project, I think it would be prudent to seek a centre, for one of our defensive assets, allowing Chevy to continue building from within (the Nashville model).
I like your enthusiasm for our prpspecta but disagree strongly.

We will ne in a sore spot of we expect hainsy to fill enstroms spot. Not to mention hainsy is ufa the same yeiar.

Mittens played quitevwell in his last 25 games. If he keeps it up next year hell be peoviding perfect bottom sixx acoring depth.

Im a machacek fan but expecting him to stick in the top 6 is crazy optimistic.

And i dobt want glass on my thirsd line

It would be wonderfulbif that was viable but i think we need to temper your expevtationa of our youth.

Grind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2012, 09:37 AM
  #445
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,917
vCash: 50
Voyageur, I agree with the spirit of your post, but disagree on a few points.

1) I strongly disagree with you valuations of Enstrom. Raymond and Tanev? A team could probably get Raymond for the cost of his airfare.

2) Glass should be nowhere near a 3rd line IMO.

3) I don't think Hainsey can handle 1st pairing minutes or assignments, nor do I think Stuart can handle 2nd pair minutes or assignments (over the long haul. Stuart can probably handle them when needed, but not as a rule IMO).

I agree that it might be prudent to move a defenseman and try to acquire a centre (or even a RW) for the 2nd line. Looking around the league and seeing how many teams are looking for a #1 LHD, I think it might be better to hang on to Enstrom (if he's willing), and try to move someone like Hainsey, Clitsome, or a prospect to get one instead. We wouldn't get as great of a return obviously as if we moved Enstrom, but I'm wondering if we move Enstrom if we just aren't patching one hole and making a similar, or larger hole somewhere else.

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2012, 03:06 PM
  #446
voyageur
Registered lunatic
 
voyageur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: negotiable
Country: Canada
Posts: 897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
Voyageur, I agree with the spirit of your post, but disagree on a few points.

1) I strongly disagree with you valuations of Enstrom. Raymond and Tanev? A team could probably get Raymond for the cost of his airfare.

2) Glass should be nowhere near a 3rd line IMO.

3) I don't think Hainsey can handle 1st pairing minutes or assignments, nor do I think Stuart can handle 2nd pair minutes or assignments (over the long haul. Stuart can probably handle them when needed, but not as a rule IMO).

I agree that it might be prudent to move a defenseman and try to acquire a centre (or even a RW) for the 2nd line. Looking around the league and seeing how many teams are looking for a #1 LHD, I think it might be better to hang on to Enstrom (if he's willing), and try to move someone like Hainsey, Clitsome, or a prospect to get one instead. We wouldn't get as great of a return obviously as if we moved Enstrom, but I'm wondering if we move Enstrom if we just aren't patching one hole and making a similar, or larger hole somewhere else.
Fair enough, I am probably overvaluing Raymond, count me as a fan of his, he may be on the soft side, and I think Boychuk's cheap shot slowed him down this year, but I see enormous potential based on his skating potential, a guy like Wheeler who can keep sustained offensive zone pressure by always moving his feet. For what is worth I am not sure the Canucks would want Enstrom, although he would make their PP feared again.

Glass is probably a 4th liner at best, but he did play on a decent checking line in Vancouver with Wellwood, if I remember correctly. Maybe his kind are a dime a dozen, but he seems to fit well with Slater, and chemistry is more important than talent at times, I think. Maybe I'm still nostalgic for the Moose, who knows.

I really don't know where the Jets are in terms of negotiations with Enstrom or Hainsey, but if I suggested Enstrom it is because I believe Hainsey is a top PK guy. We lost Oduya, and I think that trade was directly responsible for us missing the playoffs, as we were the only team in a playoff spot who traded a roster player without getting one back. Adding Clitsome off waivers gave us depth, but downgraded our defensive talent. I guess if the picks pan out down the road, it will be a good trade. Postma has some potential to take Enstrom's PP QB role. I don't see anyone on our roster who could take Hainsey's PK minutes, Kulda has the ability to be effective on the PK, but he would simply be filling Oduya's role from last year, at a fraction of the cost. I'm still astonished we didn't lose him on waivers. Essentially I believe that is impossible to give Postma a shot, unless we dress 7 d, with both Byfuglien and Enstrom in the lineup, that is simply not enough hard nosed defensemen IMO.

I thought last November/December showed we could win without Enstrom. But you may be right about filling one hole by creating another. Maybe we stay afloat for another year, and pursue a hometown gem like Travis Zajac next year instead.

voyageur 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 04:55 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.