HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Richard Jackman predictions

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-31-2004, 04:22 PM
  #51
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iagreewithidiots
replying to it saying you're not interested makes it sound like you're just trying to insult the Pens and really isn't appreciated.
what??

how is that??

re-read my posts on it... I said that they are a team that I don't follow right now cause I'm not interested in them compared to the other teams in the league...

how many teams do you follow?? I'm not taking about looking at standings and stats, cause a lot of us follow all teams like that... I'm talking about how many teams do you actually watch play regularily??

out of 30 teams in the league there are some that I can't follow much of - and the Pens right now are at the top of that list given their roster and play... how's that insulting the Pens?? it's the reality of the team.

I've been a pens fan in the past - mostly cause I've always been a Mario fan... because I choose to follow other teams now and am not interested in the Pens is not an insult to the team, but a reality with their roster.

this is in no way close to what that other poster said... but whatever.... like I said to the other guy, if you don't like my posts, put me on your ignore list... I really couldn't care less... been here long enough to know that there are posters that don't like what I have to say, and frankly I couldn't care if you just put me on your ignore list (actually would appreciate it since I won't have to explain myself to those that are obviously not interested).

NFITO is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 04:37 PM
  #52
Big McLargehuge
Global Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Big McLargehuge's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Iceland
Posts: 55,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldTimeHockey
Pittsburgh traded their #2 dman for their now #2 dman.
Lol..Berehowsky...#2 dman...

Berehowsky was, at best, our 6th defenseman. He was a healthy scratch and was beyond horrid.

Tarnstrom, Orpik, Melichar, and Bergevin were at least better than he was.

Big McLargehuge is online now  
Old
03-31-2004, 04:49 PM
  #53
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
what??

this is in no way close to what that other poster said... but whatever.... like I said to the other guy, if you don't like my posts, put me on your ignore list... I really couldn't care less... been here long enough to know that there are posters that don't like what I have to say, and frankly I couldn't care if you just put me on your ignore list (actually would appreciate it since I won't have to explain myself to those that are obviously not interested).
Or the alternative:

You make more educated posts.

You come off as a bandwagon fan, which is something I don't respect.

Then to top it off, you make comments on Jackman, eventhough you have't watched him play with the Pens.

You also go on to insult the Pens

"Who watches the Pens?"

Plenty of us do. See, all of us aren't bandwagon fans and abandon the team when the going gets tuff.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 04:57 PM
  #54
BlueAndWhite
Registered User
 
BlueAndWhite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful
You say that anyone saying Jackman had trade value when he was traded would have been laughed at and then go on to say Drake Berehowsky sucks...period.

Pens fans were hoping for a late draft pick for Gimpy McGimpgimp, instead we got a guy who has propelled this team forward.

I see 50 points next year.
You have a comprehension problem ?

People are now saying it's a bad deal for Toronto (isn't hindsight a lovely thing). My point of contention that four months ago, everyone said that Jackman had minimal value.

It has nothing to do with what the Leafs received for Jackman.

BlueAndWhite is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 05:02 PM
  #55
Cap'n Flavour
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Romania
Posts: 2,946
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Cap'n Flavour Send a message via MSN to Cap'n Flavour
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobv2
I think he'll hit 25-30 powerplay points alone.

The guy is money offensively, and it's not just because of his big shot. He can move the puck and he's just plain skilled. His defense has been better than average, too.

Barring injuries and all of that, and assuming he plays a top 4 role all season long and is on the #1 powerplay with Tarnstrom, I think he'll creep up towards 50 points. I wouldn't mind seeing some more bone-crunching hits as well.
Move the puck well? Maybe to make breakout passes, but on the powerplay I rarely saw him make the kind of passes that Leetch, Kaberle or McCabe did ( and do now ) whereas his hard shot was always evident. I've only seen a few games of his with the Pens but I don't think he's suddenly just develop a skill like that.

As for the talk of performing under pressure, Jackman was paired with Kaberle for quite a while and only got benched once Pilar came back from injury and started playing much more consistently. So it's not fair to say he was at the risk of being benched every time he made a mistake, rather that he made so many mistakes when given the chance that he became expendable. But that's all ancient history, it's not like the Leafs gave up anything significant to get him in the first place.

Cap'n Flavour is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 05:14 PM
  #56
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 26,165
vCash: 500
I'm talking move the puck in all facets. He makes a good breakout pass, he can lead a rush, and in the offensive zone he distributes it well (particularly on the powerplay).

Quote:
I've only seen a few games of his with the Pens but I don't think he's suddenly just develop a skill like that.
I think maybe it's been there all along, and he just needed some confidence.

Jacob is online now  
Old
03-31-2004, 05:33 PM
  #57
Luigi Lemieux
Registered User
 
Luigi Lemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 13,197
vCash: 500
i don't think it's that unreasonable that the pens have rejuvenated another career.

they've done that with kovalev, lang, straka, and tarnstrom, all within the last 5 years.

Luigi Lemieux is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 05:48 PM
  #58
benji
Took too much, man.
 
benji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Too much.
Posts: 10,452
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to benji
Quote:
Originally Posted by richardn
My predictions for Jackman for nextyear are as follows.

GP G A PTS
80 15 35 50
good call

benji is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 06:21 PM
  #59
Poignant Discussion
I tell it like it is
 
Poignant Discussion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gatineau, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Poignant Discussion Send a message via Yahoo to Poignant Discussion
There was nothing wrong with Jackman in Toronto other than the fact they are trying to win a Stanley Cup. Which means mistakes are magnified and too many mistakes causes long benchings. Which cause a player to get down on himself and then....well we all know the story.

Jackman is an above average talent always has been and always will be. Hell I picked him in the 12th round in my poll this year expecting 35 points out of him.

When Jackman gains confidence (which he still does not have 100%) then we can come back to this topic.

Until then its up in the air what this young man can do.

I think alot of Leaf fans need to have a certain player on the team to bash when things don't go as well as planned. And Rick was the guy for the most part the last couple of years. Now that he has gained a little confidence. Rather than giving credit, blame must be passed.

Good for Rick Jackman and good for the Pens team that they salvaged a pretty good player for basicly nothing. its those kinds of moves that will place them back in the elite of the NHL

That being said no blame can go to Toronto. Richard made too many mistakes on a team that was weak defensivly and did the kid a favor by moving him to a better situation for him. There is no next year for the Leafs and to retain good postioning for the playoffs they had to secure more stable defense.

All that being said I think we can expect 30-40 points from Rick. He is not going to be an elite defenseman but he will put up some numbers

Poignant Discussion is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 06:31 PM
  #60
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajs
As someone said earlier, he'd shown small glimpses of his talent, but the Leafs didn't stick with him and got Berehowsky. What has he really done for either team all year?

Bad trade then, worse trade now.
Despite alot of Pens fans disagreeing, I thought that the Drake played rather well for the Penguins. He had his mishaps on defense of course, but he certainly provided the team with some timely offense and stability on the blueline.

That being said, in terms of production going each way, this has to be the most lopsided trade that I can remember in recent memory. Does any other trade that you guys can think of come close to being this lopsided?

stardog is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 06:40 PM
  #61
richardn
Registered User
 
richardn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by <Mr Jiggyfly>
He was watching games from the Press Box back then, perilously close to being a bust.

So yes, any Leaf fan who suggested he had the potential to do what he has just done with the Pens, would probably of been laughed at.

Just the nature of the beast, I suppose.

The difference is he is showing what he can do now.



He's no Ian Moran.



Jackman has been playing well behind his own blueline as well. I have no idea why people keep assuming he is making all of these mistakes in his own zone.

That is just inaccurate.

I watch Jackman exclusively on every one of his shifts.

He has made about three boneheaded plays since he came over, one was a pass off the half boards to the middle of the ice that was intercepted..but he hussled back and blocked the shot; another time he tried to pass the puck from behind his goal line to a teammate, instead of dumping the puck out; and finally, he lost the puck in his own zone when trying to regroup, and the backchecker took it off him and had a great scoring chance.

Other than these few mistakes he has been very solid in his own end. He stays with his assignment in the def. zone very well, he plays mean and phy., when he has a chance to get the puck out, he does (almost without fail), he makes excellent outlet passes, and he has a keen sense of when to pinch and when not to.

I don't know what else the Pens could ask from him.

If you have any doubts about his impact, check the Pens record before they acquired Jackman, and after.

The playing under pressure stigma is also bs. If I hear that one more time I may crack a rib from lmao. Anytime you play in the NHL there is pressure on you.

Playing for the Leafs, Jackman said he would get benched anytime he made a mistake. So when he was out there he would always be worrying about making a mistake, and not what his assignments where.

I don't know any athlete that could play well under those circumstances.

It is called playing through your mistakes, and he was given a chance to do that for the Pens. It has paid off well for them on both the offensive and defensive side.
Finally someone else out their who is actually watching him play out their. His D is no where near as bad as everyone sais it is. I seen him play all his junior hockey and followed him through his NHL career. His defence is excellent most of the time. It is only when he struggles offencively that his defensive game is a liability. The main reason for this is because he trys to hard and makes mistakes. Sound like anyone. Brian McCabe anyone. I think Jackman will be just as good as Brian McCabe offensively and defensively. +/- is very over rated and even still Jackman is only -4 on the Pens Through 23 games. +/- is has more to do with the lines total defensive play.

richardn is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 06:51 PM
  #62
richardn
Registered User
 
richardn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,973
vCash: 500
I would just like to point out that Jackman is going to live up to his draft potential. The reason why Jackman has struggled in his early days in the NHL are simple. Back in Junior Hockey Dallas drafted the guy 5th overall and he came back to junior hockey with a huge signing bonus from Dallas. He let all the money get to him and became an Alcoholic. Dallas and Boston both gave up on him for this. Jackman has been sober now this season and has gotten back to a level of play that he used to be at. Trust me wnhen I say that nobody has seen his max potential yet.

richardn is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 07:01 PM
  #63
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
It's amazing how some players can put up awesome numbers when there is no pressure to win... they don't have to worry about the defensive zone or to actually help the team win games, just to put up points...
I actually disagree with this statement. By saying this you aren't showing that you know the way Edzo uses and treats his players. Simply put, despite the numbers he may put up, he has to be somewhat responsible defensivley. And he has been responsible defensivley.
There are quite a few cases of guys putting up numbers this season in Pitt, yet having either been demoted or benched for being defensivly deficient.
I realize the irony in that statement because of the simple fact that Pitt has been a lousy defensive team all season. But Jackman has rarely contributed to that aspect and in fact has been a stabilizing force in our own end of the ice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
but if the Pens are actually hoping to win games next year, watch for players like Jackman and Tarnstrom to have their numbers drop - and maybe even significantly.... putting up 50 pts a season for a dman means nothing if they have a -35 to accompany that...
I agree and disagree with these points. Perhaps the numbers will drop in some aspect if they aren't allowed to jump in as much offensivley and instead concentrate strenuously on the defensive side of the game.
But if you look where the majority of thier points accumulate, it is from the power play. And being on the point for a full season with Tarnstrom, he should be able to solidify those numbers.

I also think that the +/- is a poor way to indicate an individuals overall performance in his own zone. It simply does not take into account the many other contributing factors which help the stat to become what it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
Jackman IMO is an average overall dman... maybe has above average potential offensively, but not nearly as good defensively... as soon as he's got responsibilities out there that he has to meet defensively, his numbers will drop.
Perhaps over all that is true, and only time will tell. But in his 23 games with the Penguins, he has been anything but average. And to say that a defensman who puts up 23 points in 23 games is only above average offensivley is incorrect IMO. It is outstanding. For his time with the Penguins, he has been incredible...not average or above average. Perhaps you are talking about what he may achieve over the next couple of years. If so then I may agree with you somewhat. But like I said, only time will tell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
Put Delmore on the Pens and I'm sure he'll look like he's got Norris numbers when it comes to his offensive game... Tarnstrom has got that now, and a season ago he was waiver material... still now he's a PP QB who can put up points, but is not a dman that most top teams would even want on their team - as a dman a -36 rating is absolutely brutal, not matter the team you play for.... even on the bad pens team his +/- is the 3rd worst on the team (behind Fata's -46 and Orpik's -38)...
The Delmore opinion is pure speculation of course. Perhaps he would and perhaps he wouldn't. Again, it has only been 23 games of course, but his play for those 23 games has been much better than Delmore in both ends of the ice.

As for Tarnstrom, the simple fact that he was a waiver pick up two years ago has no bearing on his value.
Lang was a waiver pick up as was St. Louis. Both players have led the league in scoring at different times this season, and in the case of St. Louis he may win the Hart trophy.

Furthermore, as I have stated, it really isn't either accurate or fair to base one's defensive play on his +/- rating. Jeff Halpern is widely regarded as one of the top defensive forwards in the NHL and look at his +/-. Would it be fair to make the same accusations about his defensive game solely on that stat alone?
Of course it wouldn't.

Tarnstrom's defensive game is a common misconception for people who do not watch him play with any regularity. He is NOT good in his own zone, but he is not poor either. Watch him play with some frequency and you will see why I say this. He is average in his own zone. Perhaps slightly below average.
But to say he is atrocious would be a grave mistake.

And, having said that, GM's know this and do not evaluate based on the +/- stat as well. To say that he wouldn't be wanted on most top teams is also speculation. I will throw out my own speculation and say that he would be wanted on any top team. The third highest scoring defensman in the league, and elite power play quarterback who leads ll defensemen in power play points would be a welcome addition on any team.
The Penguins have little star power. And Tarnstrom runs that power play and has helped to make it the best power play in the league in recent months. That is quite an accomplishment for a team that many have slammed as having only AHL talent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
Jackman I think is a decent #6/7 on most teams... he's a #3/4 on a bad team... never a guy that you will want anchoring your PK unit though, and not one that will be useful checking the better forwards in the league, or matched up against a team's top offensive unit... I think that top 2 dmen need to be good enough to do that... a top scoring dman with defensive liabilities - well we've all seen and followed the career of Andy Delmore.
I dont disagree with all of your points and you are certainly entitled to your opinion. You may even be right. I just think that your evaluation of both players is way off base. I would say that Jackman for most of the season WAS a 6/7 on most teams. Right now though, he is one of the top offensive defensemen in the league.
Only time will tell if he can solidify that claim, but basing this solely on his vast improvement since the trade, he has become a much better player than a 6/7 guy.

How many games have you watched him play in since the trade? Because he is a much different player than he was a short three months ago. It seems that your evaluation would be correct about him if he were still in Toronto, but given his improvements in leaps and bounds, it wouldn't be accurate to say that he is the same player and judge him accordingly IMO.

stardog is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 07:02 PM
  #64
richardn
Registered User
 
richardn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,973
vCash: 500
People say plus minus is so very important and it determines how good defensively a player is. Aki Berg is -4 on the Leafs which is the worst plus minus on the Leafs Defensemen. He only has 2 goals and seven assists in 77 games. Quinn continues to go with him as a top four dman. Yet lots of Leafs fans say he is awsome and is better then Jackman . If the Leafs were going to bench someone and give up on someone it should have been Berg.

richardn is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 07:05 PM
  #65
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle
I was at the Penguins game when they tied Philly a few weeks ago: some thoughts.

One of the greatest defensive plays I've seen all season came in OT (either OT or in the 3rd.. forget which) when a Flyer forward had a breakaway and Jackman rushed back, dove down and swept the puck from in front of the player as he wound up to shot. He didn't have a bad giveaway that whole game and he was one of the best players out there.

Since his arrival in Pittsburgh, he helped end their 18 game losing streak and has been 1 PPG. He is a -4 on the most scored upon team in the league. Now, he's gotten 15 of his 23 points on the PP which means 8 at ES. Leads one to believe that he's been on the ice for 12 goals against in 23 games in Pittsburgh. Considering that this team allows on average 3.725 goals/game, and Jackman has been on this ice for 0.522 goals against/game and averaging 24:24 TOI.

Face it: he's not as bad defensively as everyone is making him out to be, and he's just as good offensively as everyone is making him out to be. He's getting a chance and he's making the best of it.
Bravo! Great stat and mathematical work there. Logic and reasoning

I didnt even think to compare the numbers in such a way.

Jacko has made his share of defensive mistakes mind you. But he is certainly learning from them and getting better in that department.
It isn't like he is Andy Delmore (though the comparison was made).

stardog is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 07:28 PM
  #66
devildan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stardog
Bravo! Great stat and mathematical work there. Logic and reasoning

I didnt even think to compare the numbers in such a way.

Jacko has made his share of defensive mistakes mind you. But he is certainly learning from them and getting better in that department.
It isn't like he is Andy Delmore (though the comparison was made).
Reasoning is incredibly flawed

Quote:
Originally Posted by devildan
Faulty reasoning on a few levels

1) He dosnt have to get a point for every time his team scores when he is on the ice

2) PK goals dont count for +/-

3) The Pens have been hot recently. For some reason I would tend to believe that they have given up less than 3.725 gpg since he joined them.

I think that it is safe to say that he has been on the ice for more than 12 GA.

devildan is offline  
Old
03-31-2004, 07:32 PM
  #67
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by devildan
Reasoning is incredibly flawed
I believe he was talking about even strength.
And if the reasoning IS flawed, wouldn't you agree that it is just as faulty to base how proficient one is in his own zone on what thier +/- is? Or even reasonably faulty?


Last edited by stardog: 04-01-2004 at 01:53 AM.
stardog is offline  
Old
04-01-2004, 04:58 PM
  #68
devildan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stardog
I believe he was talking about even strength.
And if the reasoning IS flawed, wouldn't you agree that it is just as faulty to base how proficient one is in his own zone on what thier +/- is? Or even reasonably faulty?
Go back and read his post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle
Since his arrival in Pittsburgh, he helped end their 18 game losing streak and has been 1 PPG. He is a -4 on the most scored upon team in the league. Now, he's gotten 15 of his 23 points on the PP which means 8 at ES. Leads one to believe that he's been on the ice for 12 goals against in 23 games in Pittsburgh. Considering that this team allows on average 3.725 goals/game, and Jackman has been on this ice for 0.522 goals against/game and averaging 24:24 TOI.
He said that the team only gives up .522 gpg when Jackman is on the ice (using his faulty +/- and goals on the ice for stats).

Now show me where I said that +/- was a good indicator on ones defensive play. I personally think the +/- stat sucks. All I was saying was that his logic was completly flawed and he should get no credit for coming up with anything that would help Jackmans cause.

devildan is offline  
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 12:25 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.