HFBoards

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

Tonight's Blues Buzz - Comments re: Jackman

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-25-2008, 10:03 AM
  #26
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,599
vCash: 500
I continue to think that most people here have way too high an opinion of Jackman.

I don't see much demand for his services at the deadline. They'll be lucky to get a third round pick - maybe a second.

His game does not work in the new NHL and he's too undersized to play physical. Great heart but not much of an impact player.

He's having such a poor year before free agency that I think he'll have to take a lowball contract somewhere to try and rebuild his game and seek big money after that.

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:21 AM
  #27
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,073
vCash: 500
just a thought, but a Phaneuf/Jackman combo sounds right and scares the crap out of me.

WalterSobchak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:22 AM
  #28
Stealth JD
Drexel's dead!!!
 
Stealth JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Safari Motor Motel
Country: United States
Posts: 6,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZaphodBeeblebrox View Post
just a thought, but a Phaneuf/Jackman combo sounds right and scares the crap out of me.
much...MUCH better chance of seeing them together in Calgary than in STL.

Stealth JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:23 AM
  #29
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmans Domain View Post
much...MUCH better chance of seeing them together in Calgary than in STL.
yes, that is what I was implying. I would say there is 0% chance of that happening in STL. He's a Sutter type and a Keenan type player. I could see Sutter overpaying a little bit if Calgary stays in the hunt.

WalterSobchak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:29 AM
  #30
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,073
vCash: 500
Would anyone be interested in a Jackman and a 3rd for Huselius deal? Would Calgary even look at it?

Both are UFA's this season, maybe we can resign Kristian and see if he and Berglund have chemistry next season?

WalterSobchak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:33 AM
  #31
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZaphodBeeblebrox View Post
yes, that is what I was implying. I would say there is 0% chance of that happening in STL. He's a Sutter type and a Keenan type player. I could see Sutter overpaying a little bit if Calgary stays in the hunt.
Great point.

Plus, it is close to his hometown in B.C. So he would probably be more open to re-sign.

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:34 AM
  #32
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by execwrite View Post
I continue to think that most people here have way too high an opinion of Jackman.

I don't see much demand for his services at the deadline. They'll be lucky to get a third round pick - maybe a second.

His game does not work in the new NHL and he's too undersized to play physical. Great heart but not much of an impact player.

He's having such a poor year before free agency that I think he'll have to take a lowball contract somewhere to try and rebuild his game and seek big money after that.
I agree with what your saying execwrite. But remember that there are some GM"s out there thatalso have way too high of an opinion of Jackman.

I'm just glad his contract is up now...instead of 2009 or 2010.

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:42 AM
  #33
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,073
vCash: 500
The key to maximizing trade value with Jackman is that he is healthy. At the deadline, there are key injuries on some teams trying to win the cup and if we can keep Jackman healthy until then, overpayment is still a possibility.

We are working on a 5 year plan but some franchises are looking at winning it this year and it is a matter of timely injuries and our ability to absorb a bad contract with good prospects/picks in a deal for Jackman.

WalterSobchak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:58 AM
  #34
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
The people saying that Jackman doesn't have much value are missing the boat big time. Quite frankly you're speaking out of the disappointment that Jackman never blossomed into anything more than what he is after his rookie year gven the lofty expectations of him becoming our new Scott Stevens. When you look at what Jackman is

-26 years old
-3rd or 4th defenseman
-plays a style that will be valuable for any serious playoff threat
-a more than adequate passer
-capable of playing 20-25 minutes a night
-has name and reputation recognition
-could look better on another team than here (if paired with the right guy)
-easily going to be one of the top defensive defensemen available

to suggest that we'd be "lucky" to fetch a 3rd rounder for him is near laughable

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 01:56 PM
  #35
Robb_K
Registered User
 
Robb_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NordHolandNethrlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,534
vCash: 500
If JD/Pleau wait for the right time, they should be able to deal Jackman to a playoff team with a decimated defence. They should be able to get a late 1st rounder or a 2nd tier prospect AND a 2nd or 3rd rounder.

Robb_K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 02:37 PM
  #36
Celtic Note
Not in Ferguson
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
The people saying that Jackman doesn't have much value are missing the boat big time. Quite frankly you're speaking out of the disappointment that Jackman never blossomed into anything more than what he is after his rookie year gven the lofty expectations of him becoming our new Scott Stevens. When you look at what Jackman is

-26 years old
-3rd or 4th defenseman
-plays a style that will be valuable for any serious playoff threat
-a more than adequate passer
-capable of playing 20-25 minutes a night
-has name and reputation recognition
-could look better on another team than here (if paired with the right guy)
-easily going to be one of the top defensive defensemen available

to suggest that we'd be "lucky" to fetch a 3rd rounder for him is near laughable

Going to have to agree here!

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 02:47 PM
  #37
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
to suggest that we'd be "lucky" to fetch a 3rd rounder for him is near laughable
Now Backman on the other hand...

WalterSobchak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 04:22 PM
  #38
BluesDarb
Registered User
 
BluesDarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZaphodBeeblebrox View Post
Now Backman on the other hand...
I recently signed up for a fantasy league and as part of the "interview" I had to analyze potential trades(in the real NHL)...


One of them was Backman for Nagy and Lauri Tukonen(Kings 6th rated prospect)...

I had to restrain myself from laughing to death.

Needless to say my response was that this was an insane overpayment from LA.

BluesDarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 05:25 PM
  #39
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
The people saying that Jackman doesn't have much value are missing the boat big time. Quite frankly you're speaking out of the disappointment that Jackman never blossomed into anything more than what he is after his rookie year gven the lofty expectations of him becoming our new Scott Stevens. When you look at what Jackman is

-26 years old
-3rd or 4th defenseman
-plays a style that will be valuable for any serious playoff threat
-a more than adequate passer
-capable of playing 20-25 minutes a night
-has name and reputation recognition
-could look better on another team than here (if paired with the right guy)
-easily going to be one of the top defensive defensemen available

to suggest that we'd be "lucky" to fetch a 3rd rounder for him is near laughable
I hope you're right.

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 05:29 PM
  #40
StLooFrenchy
Registered User
 
StLooFrenchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Illinois
Country: France
Posts: 1,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
The people saying that Jackman doesn't have much value are missing the boat big time. Quite frankly you're speaking out of the disappointment that Jackman never blossomed into anything more than what he is after his rookie year gven the lofty expectations of him becoming our new Scott Stevens. When you look at what Jackman is

-26 years old
-3rd or 4th defenseman
-plays a style that will be valuable for any serious playoff threat
-a more than adequate passer
-capable of playing 20-25 minutes a night
-has name and reputation recognition
-could look better on another team than here (if paired with the right guy)
-easily going to be one of the top defensive defensemen available

to suggest that we'd be "lucky" to fetch a 3rd rounder for him is near laughable
You nailed that one. We don't have a complimentary partner for him on our current roster. Maybe we do in the "A"?

StLooFrenchy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 05:47 PM
  #41
Celtic Note
Not in Ferguson
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLooFrenchy View Post
You nailed that one. We don't have a complimentary partner for him on our current roster. Maybe we do in the "A"?
Shh....don't tell management that. Too many young guys with offensive skillls and something to prove would be too illogical

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 07:52 PM
  #42
brucegarrioch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 866
vCash: 500
Ottawa has been looking for another defenceman - just for added depth purposes heading into the post-season. Murray isn't really willing to deal anyone off the roster, however.

We could probably part with a prospect (perhaps Josh Hennessy) and a draft pick?

I've really wanted Ottawa to look at either Salvador or Jackman for the playoff run.

brucegarrioch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 08:22 PM
  #43
txbluesfan44
 
txbluesfan44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 158
vCash: 500
Well I'm confident in what I heard last night and it didnt sound like Plager was talking about last summer, but Strickland has offered this clarification over at another forum:

"AndyStrickland wrote:
The comment made by Bob Plager is not new info. Jackman rejected an offer from the Blues last summer and elected to sign a one year contract. The two sides couldn't agree on a number last summer so they decided to play out another year and take it from there. I will have a story on this later today. If there is any confusion, the Blues have not offerd Jackman an extension this season.
Best,

Andy strickland"

I'm curious if anyone else was listening to Blues Buzz last night and their interpretation of the conversation. This becoming news could limit the Blues leverage I would think, so maybe some spin-doctoring...or I could be deaf.

txbluesfan44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 09:16 PM
  #44
BluesDarb
Registered User
 
BluesDarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 512
vCash: 500
Strickland likely caught some flak from the team and he's just backtracking.

Not a doubt in my mind that Jackman will be out of STL before the end of next month.

BluesDarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:02 PM
  #45
Stealth JD
Drexel's dead!!!
 
Stealth JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Safari Motor Motel
Country: United States
Posts: 6,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BluesDarb View Post
Not a doubt in my mind that Jackman will be out of STL before the end of next month.
I agree. It pains me to see it, but it makes nothing but sense if they know they can't lock him up. The club is still rebuilding and could really use the assets that Jackman could return...and there are cheaper alternatives already in the system. It sucks that McKee's, Brewer's and Backman's contracts have basically screwed Jax...he's played just as well as any of those guys ever have for extended period in St. Louis, but he's picked the wrong season to have a career-bad year.

If he can agree to terms, I'd love to resign him and move someone else out...but i don't see him asking for significantly less money than the other 3 guys mentioned above...and i don't see the Blues offering anything close to a similar cotract.

Stealth JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 10:08 PM
  #46
rumrokh
Jake the Snake Man
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,025
vCash: 500
Yea, that really does sound like some spin-control on Strickland's part. He's often the mouthpiece who says what they want him to - OMG THERE R NO TRAEDZ! and then they make one. It's still in the realm of possibility that Jackman will sign, but I've never known of Plager to mince words like that. Honestly, who talks about last off-season in that context? It could just be a misunderstanding, but I doubt it.

But most of all, the Blues actually should trade Jackman. Their not having offered him a contract could mean a trade just as much as a rejection of an offer. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmans Domain View Post
I agree. It pains me to see it, but it makes nothing but sense if they know they can't lock him up. The club is still rebuilding and could really use the assets that Jackman could return...and there are cheaper alternatives already in the system. It sucks that McKee's, Brewer's and Backman's contracts have basically screwed Jax...he's played just as well as any of those guys ever have for extended period in St. Louis, but he's picked the wrong season to have a career-bad year.

If he can agree to terms, I'd love to resign him and move someone else out...but i don't see him asking for significantly less money than the other 3 guys mentioned above...and i don't see the Blues offering anything close to a similar cotract.
I disagree about Jackman playing as well as the other guys. They've all had their ups and downs, but honestly, Brewer has been significantly better overall. And while Backman has had some really off nights, he's also really elevated his games at times - something Jackman hasn't done for more than ten games in any one of the past two and a half seasons. McKee is arguable, but really, I think he's basically a less skilled version of Jackman who doesn't take as many penalties but actually delivers some good hits - plus, he's already under contract and will probably fetch less in a trade (for various reasons, especially the size of his cap hit).

Either way, yea, when it comes down to it, Jackman is not a unique commodity. He is easily replaced by Polak, Wagner, or Woywitka and the Blues will not be worse for the wear. If a player like that is near the end of his contract and you can get something for him, even if he's a guy you like, it's worth it. Get what you can, replace him, and move on.

Yes, ANOTHER edit:
Jackman was actually great under Murray last season. No clue what his deal is this year. But it just seems like he's expendible and the return will help the team more in the long run than trying to coddle him into form and hoping he doesn't get injured again. Then again, McClement and Stempniak rocked under Murray last season, too. I guess I'm just a little more forgiving of those guys because nobody is scoring - that leads to line juggling and weird icetimes, etc. But the team is playing very good defense and Jackman is somewhat of an exception. I don't WANT to see him go, but I have no problem with it.


Last edited by rumrokh: 01-26-2008 at 02:07 AM.
rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 11:02 PM
  #47
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmans Domain View Post
I agree. It pains me to see it, but it makes nothing but sense if they know they can't lock him up. The club is still rebuilding and could really use the assets that Jackman could return...and there are cheaper alternatives already in the system. It sucks that McKee's, Brewer's and Backman's contracts have basically screwed Jax...he's played just as well as any of those guys ever have for extended period in St. Louis, but he's picked the wrong season to have a career-bad year.

If he can agree to terms, I'd love to resign him and move someone else out...but i don't see him asking for significantly less money than the other 3 guys mentioned above...and i don't see the Blues offering anything close to a similar cotract.
If Backman's McKee's and Brewer's contracts were up for renegotiation now. Backman couldn't get a team to pay him what we are now and neither could McKee. Brewer on the other hand could without much of a problem. Heck Jackman will probably make as much if not more than Brewer after this season, and Brewer's had more responsibilities and has been better overall

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2008, 11:53 PM
  #48
St Lou Is Blue
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
If Backman's McKee's and Brewer's contracts were up for renegotiation now. Backman couldn't get a team to pay him what we are now and neither could McKee. Brewer on the other hand could without much of a problem. Heck Jackman will probably make as much if not more than Brewer after this season, and Brewer's had more responsibilities and has been better overall
Dude, I couldn't disagree more about Brewer....he has been one of the worst blues this year...his stock has dropped alot this season.

St Lou Is Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2008, 12:16 AM
  #49
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by St Lou Is Blue View Post
Dude, I couldn't disagree more about Brewer....he has been one of the worst blues this year...his stock has dropped alot this season.
He's led the Blues in icetime per game, plays against the other team's best forwards, plays on the first pk unit, and is one of the only Blues defenders who can stickhandle regularly across the opponent's blue line. Sure he has some clunker games early in the season, and still makes some noticeable mistakes that even the fair-weather fans can easily detect, but he has been a good player for the Blues this year.


The only complaints that are fair about Brewer in my opinion is that he hasn't done well enough on our powerplay and hasn't registered enough points. Given the fact that he's been forced to play as our number 1 defenseman all year and especially lately has been solid, I'm not as heartbroken about his lack of offense.


In my opinion, anyone who thinks Brewer is one of the worst Blues this season probably needs to watch a few more games and listen less to the drunken idiot fans in the crowd who weren't there from the lockout until this season

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2008, 12:19 AM
  #50
txbluesfan44
 
txbluesfan44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by St Lou Is Blue View Post
Dude, I couldn't disagree more about Brewer....he has been one of the worst blues this year...his stock has dropped alot this season.
Dude I couldn't disagree with YOU more. Brewer is our #1 whether you (we) like it or not and plays in #1 situations accordingly, which can sometimes expose flaws given that he is not a true #1. He will hold down this role for the next 4 years or until EJ takes the torch, whichever comes first, deal with it.

He has played better of late (after sucking for a stretch there admittedly) and is just hitting his prime. Murray with all his flaws about playing youth, swears by him, and that is good enough for me.

In a perfect world, Brewer would be a #2/#3, playing on our second PP unit, killing against the opponents #1/#2 PP units and logging 20-24 minutes a night as a nice, steady, high-end but not elite d-man.

In two years, I'd be elated if our defensive core resembled something roughly like:

1> EJ - Pronger-lite, but a better PP Quarterback
2> Brewer - Solid/steady and generally a bargain at $4.5M (again, in 2 years)
3> Wagner - coming into his own and a great option on the PP
4> Polak - a bigger/stronger Jackman at roughly 50% the cost
5> McKee - finishing up the last year of his contract and keeping the seat warm
6> Salvador - one of best #5/6 d-man in the league at $3M a year
6a> Cole - steps into a top 4 roll in 2010-2011 with McKee's departure

txbluesfan44 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 09:20 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.