HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Notices

Jets - Free Agents, Trades, Rumors, Speculation - Off Season 2012-13 (Part VIII)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-14-2012, 12:46 AM
  #76
sully1410
Registered User
 
sully1410's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Turner Valley, Alta.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,111
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsFan815 View Post
I would rather have Simmonds+ for Enstrom if we are trading with the flyers...
Seriously? Why?

I'd be decently happy with either or, both fill holes...but Brayden Schenn is pretty awesome.

sully1410 is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 02:54 AM
  #77
Jet
Moderator
Chevel-takesadayoff
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Glasgow
Country: Scotland
Posts: 16,918
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian North View Post
I agree with everything you said, except this. Pronger and Souray are one hundred percent to blame for the entire situation.
They had their share of blame, indeed, but the Oilers should have sucked it up for the greater good of the org and it`s reputation. It looked very bad for them in the eyes of the players.

__________________
The Olympic Line
Jet is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 07:30 AM
  #78
viper0220
Go Jets Go
 
viper0220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,503
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsFan815 View Post
I would rather have Simmonds+ for Enstrom if we are trading with the flyers...



We need a center and scheen was crazy in the playoffs.

viper0220 is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 07:52 AM
  #79
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post
Sorry guys I gave up more than I should have there......off to hide in my cave
I hear ya PS, I wouldn't expect you to say any more. Just wanted to throw that one out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsFan815 View Post
I would rather have Simmonds+ for Enstrom if we are trading with the flyers...
If we were trading Enstrom to the Flyers, my order of preference would be:

Couturier
Schenn
Voracek
Simmonds

Huffer is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 08:57 AM
  #80
Stej
Good Canadian Kid!
 
Stej's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Kirk
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,792
vCash: 500
I'm starting to lean more and more towards just re-signing Enstrom if he's willing. If he's not willing, Chevy has to try turn him into a very good young forward prospect (preferably RW) and a 1st (preferably in 2013). Heck, throw in a 2nd from us to make that happen. The better the team we're trading with is, the better the young player will have to be to offset the probability that the pick will be later in the 1st round. I'd be somewhat willing to accept a lesser player if the team we're trading with has a legit chance to be a lottery team. There will be some serious stars drafted in the top 10 of the 2013 draft.

I know some people aren't excited about trading for futures, but it's been pretty well documented that I think we're still a season away from playoff caliber so I'm less concerned with this year. I'd rather ensure a stable base for the future.

Stej is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 09:15 AM
  #81
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I hear ya PS, I wouldn't expect you to say any more. Just wanted to throw that one out there.



If we were trading Enstrom to the Flyers, my order of preference would be:

Couturier
Schenn
Voracek
Simmonds
My order would be a bit different - but that's likely splitting hairs.

I think Schenn has the potential to be a very good center (maybe 30+g, 40+a) with grit (say 80- 100 pims). Simmonds is a gritty guy too, with 30+g potential. Both guys don't mind the tough games and glove dropping situations.

Couturier and Voracek are good young players too, maybe a bit more skill but less likely to drop the mits.

Does a deal like this work?

To Winnipeg:

Schenn
Simmonds
1st rd pick 2012 (20th)

To Flyers:

Enstrom
Burmistrov
1st rd pick 2012 (9th)

Jets solidify their c and rw positions and use the 20th pick for a prospect dman like koekkoek or finn. Though if Faksa is there at #9, and philly takes him, I'd be pissed.

Flyers get a puck moving dman, a good c prospect and move up in draft.

A top 6 of Ladd/Little/Wheeler and Kane/Schenn/Simmonds appeals to me.

Bob E is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 09:32 AM
  #82
bigplay41
BIG MEECH
 
bigplay41's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,297
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to bigplay41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I hear ya PS, I wouldn't expect you to say any more. Just wanted to throw that one out there.



If we were trading Enstrom to the Flyers, my order of preference would be:

Couturier
Schenn
Voracek
Simmonds
Heard Philly is making a serious offer for Nash and Jack Johnson and would be including a lot of the players you mentioned

bigplay41 is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 09:36 AM
  #83
Guerzy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,687
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetNation View Post
Heard Philly is making a serious offer for Nash and Jack Johnson and would be including a lot of the players you mentioned
That would be quite the crazy trade if Philly were to ship a package containing some of Couturier, Schenn, Simmonds, etc.. for Nash and Johnson.

I wouldn't put it past Philly, though.. for better or worse.

__________________
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=43225&dateline=140320  8020
Guerzy is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 10:01 AM
  #84
Ziggy66
Registered User
 
Ziggy66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Killarney, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,813
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post

If we were trading Enstrom to the Flyers, my order of preference would be:

Couturier
Schenn
Voracek
Simmonds
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
My order would be a bit different - but that's likely splitting hairs.

I think Schenn has the potential to be a very good center (maybe 30+g, 40+a) with grit (say 80- 100 pims). Simmonds is a gritty guy too, with 30+g potential. Both guys don't mind the tough games and glove dropping situations.

Couturier and Voracek are good young players too, maybe a bit more skill but less likely to drop the mitts.
Huffer......Why you read my mind?!
I would also have the same order.

As for dropping the mitts, we need skilled forwards on the ice. that is what the GST line is for.

But all three are good strong physical players. Couturier also brings that classic hockey face of missing teeth to the game


And I dont want to see Schenn ever drop the mitts again after getting rocked by Kovalchuk

^^^^
ok maybe I take that back after I started watching a bunch of Kovals fights on YouTube..he has manhandled some pretty big boys


Last edited by Ziggy66: 06-14-2012 at 10:17 AM.
Ziggy66 is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 11:04 AM
  #85
PaperRockChamp
Registered User
 
PaperRockChamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wpg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,235
vCash: 50
Wasn't there a rumor of Couturier's Dad being against him playing in Wpg?

PaperRockChamp is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 11:27 AM
  #86
Ziggy66
Registered User
 
Ziggy66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Killarney, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,813
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpggrown View Post
Wasn't there a rumor of Couturier's Dad being against him playing in Wpg?
not too sure. I havnt heard that rumor yet. But we have to take rumors with a grain of salt as they are such a grey area.

Ziggy66 is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 11:30 AM
  #87
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy66 View Post
Huffer......Why you read my mind?!
I would also have the same order.

As for dropping the mitts, we need skilled forwards on the ice. that is what the GST line is for.

But all three are good strong physical players. Couturier also brings that classic hockey face of missing teeth to the game


And I dont want to see Schenn ever drop the mitts again after getting rocked by Kovalchuk

^^^^
ok maybe I take that back after I started watching a bunch of Kovals fights on YouTube..he has manhandled some pretty big boys
Any combo of 2 those 4 is an upgrade.
I like Simmonds' physical game and goal scoring potential. Voracek hasn't put up great goal totals, and simmonds has (even if it was only once this past year). But he's capable, no doubt.

Guys that can score and are tough, is a great combo, imo. Doesn't matter what kind of game the opposition wants to play, they can.

And it's nice to have that in the Top 6 with guys that play more minutes. Guys like M richards, getzlaf, backes, hartnell, doan, lucic, etc.

That physical element in our top 6 is still missing, imo. It would definitely help our road record. And its not coming with scheifele, but maybe a bit with Machacek (edit: assuming they develop into top 6 forwards in a couple of years).

Bob E is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 11:35 AM
  #88
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,003
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
Guys that can score and are tough, is a great combo, imo. Doesn't matter what kind of game the opposition wants to play, they can.

And it's nice to have that in the Top 6 with guys that play more minutes. Guys like M richards, getzlaf, backes, hartnell, doan, lucic, etc.

That physical element in our top 6 is still missing, imo. It would definitely help our road record. And its not coming with scheifele, but maybe a bit with Machacek.
I will be very suprised if machacek ends up in our top 6, and my god their better be a good reason for it.

I was as impressed with his performance as anyone and love the guy, but i don't know if he can keep pace in top 6, even just as the complementary piece.

Grind is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 11:38 AM
  #89
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stej View Post
I'm starting to lean more and more towards just re-signing Enstrom if he's willing. If he's not willing, Chevy has to try turn him into a very good young forward prospect (preferably RW) and a 1st (preferably in 2013). Heck, throw in a 2nd from us to make that happen. The better the team we're trading with is, the better the young player will have to be to offset the probability that the pick will be later in the 1st round. I'd be somewhat willing to accept a lesser player if the team we're trading with has a legit chance to be a lottery team. There will be some serious stars drafted in the top 10 of the 2013 draft.

I know some people aren't excited about trading for futures, but it's been pretty well documented that I think we're still a season away from playoff caliber so I'm less concerned with this year. I'd rather ensure a stable base for the future.
I've been back and forth on Enstrom and whether or not I think it's better to keep him or deal him.

I think if I had my choice, and if Enstrom is willing, I would resign him. The reasons are that:

1) Winnipeg may rightly or wrongly have the reputation as a destination that no UFA really wants to go. It probably won't be as easy for us to possibly plug holes in our lineup via the UFA route. If we have a UFA of our own that is willing to stay and fits into the long term plan, it might make more sense to keep him. The old "a bird in the hand being worth two in the bush" thing.

2) Looking around at other forums here, there are multiple teams that have specific threads looking for a top LH D man. One way to look at that is to say that maybe we could get a lot for Enstrom then. The other way to look at it is, maybe there are not a lot of top LH D available, and if we deal ours we are going to be SOL trying to find another one.

Huffer is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 11:56 AM
  #90
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
My order would be a bit different - but that's likely splitting hairs.

I think Schenn has the potential to be a very good center (maybe 30+g, 40+a) with grit (say 80- 100 pims). Simmonds is a gritty guy too, with 30+g potential. Both guys don't mind the tough games and glove dropping situations.

Couturier and Voracek are good young players too, maybe a bit more skill but less likely to drop the mits.

Does a deal like this work?

To Winnipeg:

Schenn
Simmonds
1st rd pick 2012 (20th)

To Flyers:

Enstrom
Burmistrov
1st rd pick 2012 (9th)

Jets solidify their c and rw positions and use the 20th pick for a prospect dman like koekkoek or finn. Though if Faksa is there at #9, and philly takes him, I'd be pissed.

Flyers get a puck moving dman, a good c prospect and move up in draft.

A top 6 of Ladd/Little/Wheeler and Kane/Schenn/Simmonds appeals to me.
I wouldn't do that.

I think Enstrom alone gets you a guy like Simmonds and the 20th. Maybe even more if you look at what Burns returned. A thread that had pretty favorable response had Enstrom and a 2nd for Simmonds and Read. I still think we could get more, but that's maybe just me.

That leaves Schenn for Burmistrov and the 9th. I am nowhere near giving up on Burmistrov, and even though I wouldn't mind Schenn, Burmistrov AND the 9th is huge overpayment for me.

Huffer is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 12:04 PM
  #91
BigTuna49
RIP KevFist
 
BigTuna49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ATL
Country: Egypt
Posts: 23,042
vCash: 1165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
My order would be a bit different - but that's likely splitting hairs.

I think Schenn has the potential to be a very good center (maybe 30+g, 40+a) with grit (say 80- 100 pims). Simmonds is a gritty guy too, with 30+g potential. Both guys don't mind the tough games and glove dropping situations.

Couturier and Voracek are good young players too, maybe a bit more skill but less likely to drop the mits.

Does a deal like this work?

To Winnipeg:

Schenn
Simmonds
1st rd pick 2012 (20th)

To Flyers:

Enstrom
Burmistrov
1st rd pick 2012 (9th)

Jets solidify their c and rw positions and use the 20th pick for a prospect dman like koekkoek or finn. Though if Faksa is there at #9, and philly takes him, I'd be pissed.

Flyers get a puck moving dman, a good c prospect and move up in draft.

A top 6 of Ladd/Little/Wheeler and Kane/Schenn/Simmonds appeals to me.
Want to add in Kane as well? We're giving up the best player and pick in this deal. That's big time overpayment.

BigTuna49 is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 12:31 PM
  #92
bigplay41
BIG MEECH
 
bigplay41's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,297
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to bigplay41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke49 View Post
Want to add in Kane as well? We're giving up the best player and pick in this deal. That's big time overpayment.
While i agree that trade would be a overpayment i dont think we would be giving up the best player. IMO Schenn is the best player

bigplay41 is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 12:40 PM
  #93
Jet
Moderator
Chevel-takesadayoff
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Glasgow
Country: Scotland
Posts: 16,918
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
I've been back and forth on Enstrom and whether or not I think it's better to keep him or deal him.

I think if I had my choice, and if Enstrom is willing, I would resign him. The reasons are that:

1) Winnipeg may rightly or wrongly have the reputation as a destination that no UFA really wants to go. It probably won't be as easy for us to possibly plug holes in our lineup via the UFA route. If we have a UFA of our own that is willing to stay and fits into the long term plan, it might make more sense to keep him. The old "a bird in the hand being worth two in the bush" thing.

2) Looking around at other forums here, there are multiple teams that have specific threads looking for a top LH D man. One way to look at that is to say that maybe we could get a lot for Enstrom then. The other way to look at it is, maybe there are not a lot of top LH D available, and if we deal ours we are going to be SOL trying to find another one.
I don't mean to pick on you or single you out but I hate this! Why are we helping propogate this myth? I'd like to see some hard evidence that supports it. I would actually like to see the org go after a big fish or two and fail before we just start accepting this as some kind of fact.

It may well be true but why accept it before we even have data that supports it?

/rant

Jet is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 12:41 PM
  #94
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke49 View Post
Want to add in Kane as well? We're giving up the best player and pick in this deal. That's big time overpayment.
I'm not convinced other teams value Enstrom as much as we might/do on these boards.

Enstrom (smallish puck mover, year away from UFA) + Burmi (inconsistent young player, with lots of potential) might be seen as not enough value for Schenn (recognized blue-chip prospect, grit and scoring) + Simmonds (gritty player who scored 28 gs). Both schenn and simmonds had good playoffs.

The difference though between #9 and #20 is potentially huge, I admit, and likely too much. Perhaps Philly needs to throw in a later pick.

Bob E is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 12:43 PM
  #95
Jet
Moderator
Chevel-takesadayoff
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Glasgow
Country: Scotland
Posts: 16,918
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetNation View Post
While i agree that trade would be a overpayment i dont think we would be giving up the best player. IMO Schenn is the best player
I think it's WAY too early to say whether Schenn or Burmistrov are the best player in that deal.

Everyone knows Burmi's history and I think we need to see him this season before we can adjust what he might become. Schenn came along in a very sheltered environment. He looks like a keeper but it is still too early to guess what will happen for him.

Schenn could have a major softmore slump, Burmi could add 15 pounds of muscle and start taking the puck to the net and things could be extremely different next year. That is the reality of very young players.

I will say I cringe thinking about giving up on Burmistrov right now though. You can see what he might become and if that happens we will look like fools if we give him away.

Jet is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 12:57 PM
  #96
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet View Post
I don't mean to pick on you or single you out but I hate this! Why are we helping propogate this myth? I'd like to see some hard evidence that supports it. I would actually like to see the org go after a big fish or two and fail before we just start accepting this as some kind of fact.

It may well be true but why accept it before we even have data that supports it?

/rant
That's why I said rightly or wrongly.

I'm not saying it is true, but until like you said we land a big UFA fish, I think this stereotype is going to exist.

As for Enstrom, one thing I was trying to say there is that even if we aren't the UFA wasteland that others want to paint us to be, I really also don't see us as a UFA destination either. Maybe once or twice if we are really contending, but in general I just don't see us as a major player year in and year out for the top UFA's.

Now saying that, my point is, if you know or have an idea that you may not be a major player for the top UFA's, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing to keep one of your own potential top UFA eligible players if he is amiable to staying with the org.

Huffer is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 01:03 PM
  #97
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
Maybe even more if you look at what Burns returned.
Not sure we want a Burns/Enstrom comparison. I'm not sure many would prefer Toby over Burns.

Toby had an off year offensively, but he's not a 'hitting' dman (24) or 'shot blocking' (38) one either. So if he isn't putting up good pts offensively, with a strong +/-, he may have 'limited' value to other teams, imo.

Which may mean, all the more reason to keep him. if moving him means you don't receive his value.

Bob E is online now  
Old
06-14-2012, 01:04 PM
  #98
Jet
Moderator
Chevel-takesadayoff
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Glasgow
Country: Scotland
Posts: 16,918
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huffer View Post
That's why I said rightly or wrongly.

I'm not saying it is true, but until like you said we land a big UFA fish, I think this stereotype is going to exist.

As for Enstrom, one thing I was trying to say there is that even if we aren't the UFA wasteland that others want to paint us to be, I really also don't see us as a UFA destination either. Maybe once or twice if we are really contending, but in general I just don't see us as a major player year in and year out for the top UFA's.

Now saying that, my point is, if you know or have an idea that you may not be a major player for the top UFA's, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing to keep one of your own potential top UFA eligible players if he is amiable to staying with the org.
Oh no, I get that, Huffy. I'm just saying that you go on to suggest that because we have some illusion that we can't attract Free Agents that we should just settle for what we have if they will sign. NOTICE*** I am not suggesting signing Enstrom is settling. I do like Toby and if he were to sign a fair contract with Winnipeg, I would be very happy. However, if we were to trade him for a good young forward and then go after a defenceman in FA I'd also be happy.

It's like we are all afraid that no one will come play here, even though a guy like Zach Bogosian said he is really happy to be here, and a guy like Jim Slater, an American who could have probably gotten a few huns more to play in a more glamorous market decided to stay here for 3 years.

I, personally see more signs that players will come here, than that players won't come here. Of course, I am a positive guy, and I love my city (not that you guys don't). I see the reason why hockey players would want to come here. If we build a perennial winner and a first class org. that treats the players right it's something that we can absolutely maintain.

Jet is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 01:05 PM
  #99
Stej
Good Canadian Kid!
 
Stej's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Kirk
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,792
vCash: 500
As for the UFA thing, I think Winnipeg will be a polarizing place for players. Some will love it and some will hate it. That is better than being a middle-of-the-pack franchise in all respects.

Stej is offline  
Old
06-14-2012, 01:16 PM
  #100
Bob E
Registered User
 
Bob E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob E View Post
Not sure we want a Burns/Enstrom comparison. I'm not sure many would prefer Toby over Burns.
I know you weren't comparing them directly, my thought is Burns would likely command more in a trade due to his size, being more physical then toby, and having very good skill too.

I think Burns' overall value is greater, so toby's return would likely be less. Just my opinion. Come playoff time, I think far more teams would rather have Burns than toby.

Bob E is online now  
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 01:48 PM.

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.