HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Glencross in Edmonton

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-25-2008, 08:46 AM
  #1
JacketsIslesFan
 
JacketsIslesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Glencross in Edmonton

I was pretty shocked and not that happy when we traded Glencross to begin with, and it does not help things that he is playing so well in Edmonton. He has 10 points in about 20 GP, is a +8, and really seems to be clicking on the 4th line with Brodziak and Stortini. They scored 2 goals in their game last night. The guys on XM said they couldn't even be called an 'energy' line, but more of a 'Kamikaze' line. I thought he fit in well here and liked him very much, as he seemed to really get along with the other young guys on the team, he liked it here, and I thought he brought great effort every game. The guy scored a goal in his very first game with us, for goodness sake (if I remember correctly). And in his very first game against us!

What do you guys think? Did we get equal value for this guy in Tarnstrom?

JacketsIslesFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 09:11 AM
  #2
Skraut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Enter city here
Posts: 10,344
vCash: 500
"Equal" is a hard term. Both teams got what they needed in a low risk deal. Columbus is overflowing with 3rd and 4th liners, and desperately needed a puck moving defenseman. Tarnstrom wasn't getting much playing time in Edmonton, so the deal just fit. Both players are UFA's at the end of the season, and it gave both teams a chance to give each player a "Test Drive"

Skraut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 09:20 AM
  #3
cbj21
Registered User
 
cbj21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Shampoo land
Country: Norway
Posts: 2,533
vCash: 500
If those points where as a Jacket you would be on to something, but it wasn't.

cbj21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 09:21 AM
  #4
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
The Glencross for Tarnstrom trade looked OK a few weeks ago, but increasingly looks like a loser for us. However, it doesn't bother me. Sometimes you gotta fill a hole even if it costs you in the long run.

I also get a perverse sense of enjoyment out of seeing guys we trade do well. Hartigan raising the cup. Jody on the Sharks. Zherdev for Malkin. Not sure why, just do.

JACKETfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 09:30 AM
  #5
JacketsIslesFan
 
JacketsIslesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbj21 View Post
If those points where as a Jacket you would be on to something, but it wasn't.
To be fair, he did have 12 points in 36 games on a more offensively-challenged team.

JacketsIslesFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 09:32 AM
  #6
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,938
vCash: 500
We still have Glencross on the team. Only his name is Murray.

CapnCornelius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 10:20 AM
  #7
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,915
vCash: 500
Just get use to the "all things PEI", just change the PEI, with Edmonton Oilers

BluejacketNut is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 10:47 AM
  #8
Double-Shift Lassé
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassé's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,847
vCash: 500
Glencross is a guy. Bully for him that he's doing well in EDM, but I don't miss him.

Although I think Howson should stop trading anyone who might play well with his new team. I mean, that just makes him look stupid and foolish.

__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
Double-Shift Lassé is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 12:12 PM
  #9
JacketsIslesFan
 
JacketsIslesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Ok, no need for the dripping sarcasm - I was just curious as to what your opinions were. I don't think I suggested Howson looked stupid or foolish for trading GlenX, which is why I asked if you all thought we got equal value in return. No big!!

JacketsIslesFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 12:22 PM
  #10
Casework
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 5,739
vCash: 500
I think the feelings were that Glencross wouldn't be re-signed, and Tarnstrom helped us more(at the time) fight for a playoff spot. We also get to see how he meshes with our defensive group and have the inside track to re-sign him if we want. I'm really not a fan of Tarnstrom at all, but the deal is clearly a win-win in my book.

I hope Glencross continues to do well in Edmonton, he's a good kid and now he gets to play close to home, good for him.

Also it did open up the spot for Murray, who at worst looks like he'll be a solid NHL 4th liner.

Casework is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 12:25 PM
  #11
Double-Shift Lassé
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassé's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacketsIslesFan View Post
Ok, no need for the dripping sarcasm - I was just curious as to what your opinions were. I don't think I suggested Howson looked stupid or foolish for trading GlenX, which is why I asked if you all thought we got equal value in return. No big!!
I guess the sarcasm came off harsh. Gotta admit though, there's a mad fixation around here with "how well" former Jackets are doing with their new teams.

So, to answer your question:
A young player who'd shown a bit of promise as a plugger for an aging on-dimensional d-man seems like "unequal." But given the plugger is easily replaced and the team needed a blueliner, kit seems like a win-win and fair value all around.

Double-Shift Lassé is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 01:22 PM
  #12
JacketsIslesFan
 
JacketsIslesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassé View Post
I guess the sarcasm came off harsh. Gotta admit though, there's a mad fixation around here with "how well" former Jackets are doing with their new teams.

So, to answer your question:
A young player who'd shown a bit of promise as a plugger for an aging on-dimensional d-man seems like "unequal." But given the plugger is easily replaced and the team needed a blueliner, kit seems like a win-win and fair value all around.
No problem. Although, I must say, I spend more time on the NYI board and have never started a thread or complained about a player getting traded away before, especially on this board. So, now that I know it happens alot, I'll be aware of it.

And thanks for your answer, which I like, because it justifies what my initial feelings were as well as explaining the logic behind that decision. I get why we did it initially. I just don't know if Tarnstrom has helped us as much as we initially hoped. If he sticks around next season (what are the chances of that?), maybe he will be able to put forth a more solid showing than what we've seen thus far.

I know one of our biggest problems has been our PP%, and I'm sure Tarnstrom was supposed to help change that, so I definitely appreciate GMSH's intentions there. And I will concede that hindsight is always 20/20. I guess my question is, what made GMSH want to trade GlenX instead of Murray (or one of our many other 4th liners), when Murray wasn't seeing much playing time in the bigs compared to GlenX? Does he have more upside?

JacketsIslesFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 01:25 PM
  #13
Monk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,268
vCash: 500
I can't really answer your question about Glencross Vs. Murray, but I will say I like Murray more.

Monk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 01:31 PM
  #14
Double-Shift Lassé
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassé's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacketsIslesFan View Post

I know one of our biggest problems has been our PP%, and I'm sure Tarnstrom was supposed to help change that, so I definitely appreciate GMSH's intentions there. And I will concede that hindsight is always 20/20. I guess my question is, what made GMSH want to trade GlenX instead of Murray (or one of our many other 4th liners), when Murray wasn't seeing much playing time in the bigs compared to GlenX? Does he have more upside?
GlenX had already shown flashes with the big club when he was dealt, but Howson was dealing from strength because he had a guy or maybe even guys who he felt could give him the same, is my take. And I can support that thinking even if Tarnstrom isn't brought back. (And, since I'm sure someone will ask, as my opinion is so valued...) I'd only look to bring Dickie T back if the team can't come to reasonable terms with Hollywood.

Double-Shift Lassé is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 01:46 PM
  #15
Real_Estate-Agent
Registered User
 
Real_Estate-Agent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk View Post
I can't really answer your question about Glencross Vs. Murray, but I will say I like Murray more.
Murray is signed for the next three years at a very good price......

There was a need / void for a 4th line "crash & bash" player in Edmonton...... Nobody knew for sure if Glencross was that player - he was just being given an opportunity - sometimes it works; sometimes it does not...

Having said that, I suspect Glencross is very motivated playing so close to his family......

Real_Estate-Agent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 05:06 PM
  #16
jktsfan*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Thornville, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,018
vCash: 500
Frankly - I miss him (Glencross) He appeared to me to have great heart and frequently small spurts of considerably good skill - I think he will get better and better for the next 2 years.

jktsfan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 06:22 PM
  #17
Hockey Granny
 
Hockey Granny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,363
vCash: 500
I think this is a very reasonable question and a good one. My take on the trade is that at the time we hoped Tarnstrom would bring us something we desperately needed, whereas the loss of Glencross wasn't a void we could not fill. This is probably overly simplistic, but is my thoughts. Whether or not we are better off, well.. that is just a matter of perspective. Plus things have changed now. <groan> I am glad to see Glencross doing well. Like Jody in S.J., I am happy when one of our guys actually gets to play and makes a difference, even if it's somewhere else. Like so much of the CBJ "history" there is often a bittersweet touch to every side story.

--Granny

Hockey Granny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 06:57 PM
  #18
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,247
vCash: 500
We've got plenty of Glencrosses.... That said, I can't understand why Tarnstrom has been a healthy scratch a few times.... clearly, this wasn't such a steal of a deal....

KeithBWhittington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 07:16 PM
  #19
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,182
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Quote:
Originally Posted by contingent_23 View Post
We've got plenty of Glencrosses.... That said, I can't understand why Tarnstrom has been a healthy scratch a few times.... clearly, this wasn't such a steal of a deal....
It was a dumb trade, useless actually. I like Dick but his career is over.

Robert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 07:21 PM
  #20
JacketsIslesFan
 
JacketsIslesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real_Estate-Agent View Post
Murray is signed for the next three years at a very good price......

There was a need / void for a 4th line "crash & bash" player in Edmonton...... Nobody knew for sure if Glencross was that player - he was just being given an opportunity - sometimes it works; sometimes it does not...

Having said that, I suspect Glencross is very motivated playing so close to his family......
Ahhhh... the 3-year contract makes a difference. Also, I'm thinking maybe Edmonton had an idea who they wanted and made Howson aware of it.

JacketsIslesFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 07:41 PM
  #21
jcorb58
Registered User
 
jcorb58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
It was a dumb trade, useless actually. I like Dick but his career is over.
Some guys just fit into a new enviroment and GlenX definately has energized our 4th line. If it make you guys feel better you got a steal with signing Hejda. We had our heads up our ***** letting him walk. I wish you guys all the best. On my fantasy team i have Voracek and Russell so i really want you guys to do great. Tarns was just a stop gap for you guys anyways.

jcorb58 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2008, 08:15 PM
  #22
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,182
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcorb58 View Post
Some guys just fit into a new enviroment and GlenX definately has energized our 4th line. If it make you guys feel better you got a steal with signing Hejda. We had our heads up our ***** letting him walk. I wish you guys all the best. On my fantasy team i have Voracek and Russell so i really want you guys to do great. Tarns was just a stop gap for you guys anyways.
Hedja was a good pickup, he and perhaps Peca is it for your Howson dude so far. If we have 77 points at this time next then you win the war.

Robert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2008, 11:02 AM
  #23
jore
Registered User
 
jore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 366
vCash: 500
We have plenty of 3rd/4th line forwards. Glencross was a healthy scratch several times, so trading him didn't hurt us. Having Glencross play instead of Murray wouldn't have made any difference for our season.

At the time we had a realistic chance to make the playoffs. Power play was struggling, and we lacked a puck moving defenseman. Tärnström had potential to help us on both. Both Glencross & Tärnström will be RFA/UFA this summer, so we pretty much gave up nothing for the possibility to (dramatically) improve our team for the rest of the season.

Sometimes these deals work out, sometimes they don't. Tärnström didn't do much for us, but the standings/club future wouldn't be any better if we hadn't made the trade.

Geoff Platt was also an extra piece for us, so we traded him. Currently he's playing in the AHL, while the two defenders we got from the trade are playing very well in the NHL.

jore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2008, 11:41 AM
  #24
Casework
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 5,739
vCash: 500
Good post, jore. And to trace this path back even further - Hartigan and Motzko turned into Konopka and Glencross. Platt turned into Aaron Rome and Clay Wilson. Glencross turned into Dick Tarnstrom.

Who would you guys rather have? Hartigan, Motzko, and Platt or Konopka, Rome, Wilson, and Tarnstrom?

I wouldn't go as far to say our depth dramatically improved, but the moves involving those players really did strengthen us in Syracuse specifically.

Casework is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2008, 12:28 PM
  #25
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casework View Post
Good post, jore. And to trace this path back even further - Hartigan and Motzko turned into Konopka and Glencross. Platt turned into Aaron Rome and Clay Wilson. Glencross turned into Dick Tarnstrom.

Who would you guys rather have? Hartigan, Motzko, and Platt or Konopka, Rome, Wilson, and Tarnstrom?

I wouldn't go as far to say our depth dramatically improved, but the moves involving those players really did strengthen us in Syracuse specifically.
Glencross turned into Murray, because without him leaving, Murray wouldn't have gotten the ice time. You could say that GlenX also turned into Lindstrom and Picard for the same reason. Or you could say that Fedorov DIDN'T turn into somebody, or Foote turned into Rusty-Jan, or ...

JACKETfan 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 07:01 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.