2014 CBJ Offseason Thread III (All proposals, "blog" rumors, speculation in here)

[db2011]

The you are easily confused, as it's been explained any number of times. Again, I believe you are purposefully ignoring said explanations.

Or, it could even be that IHZ's reasons for not considering the trade are as or more reasonable than the fantasy hot stove wheeling and dealing regarding Anisimov.

There is a lot of preoccupation with highly skilled offensive players (like a projected Wennberg) that are pursued at the expense of a well-rounded team. That preoccupation is represented in questioning whether it's better if the Jackets miss the playoffs so they can win the lottery, in the received wisdom that Jared Boll is doesn't have a role on this team, and that Anisimov becomes expendable if/when Wennberg emerges.

 

[EspenK]

Probably not a comparable. He's never played more than 51 games.

We're looking at anywhere between 7-8 million for Bob.

But he's played 143 in his career with a 2.12 GAA and a .925 save %.

Bob for his career is 179 games, 2.46 GAA and a .919 save % .

Throw out Bob's one bad year and without doing the math his numbers look like they are in the same ballpark as Schneider.

One other thing to consider is Bob will still be an RFA next year, Schneider would have been a UFA.

My guess is Bob has proven enough he'll get something comparable to or slightly better than Schneider. I say no more somewhere in the 6-7 mill range and a comparable term. I'd like to have Jarmo do another bridge on amicable terms but in today's market that probably won't happen, imo.

 

[WannabeFinn]

Yes, I have to believe that Bob's next contract is going to be very similar to this one.

It is amazing to me that Bob is actually 3 years younger than Schneider.

Using Crawford, Rask and Schneider as comparisons, I'm going to guess that Bob is going to get 7 or 8 years x 6.5 million (lower AAV than Rask, higher AAV than the other two).

less than a 900k pay bump, with the cap going up, after his "prove it" contract? I would love to get him for only 6.5/year, but I just think that's a good bit lower than what he'll command


edit: I take that back.. somewhat. 6.5m is more reasonable than what I initially thought. Still think he's going to try and push for closer to 7m, though.

 

[major major]

Probably not a comparable. He's never played more than 51 games.

We're looking at anywhere between 7-8 million for Bob.

No one is out there asking, "But can Schneider handle a starter's workload?" That was an out of date question years ago.

The guy is like Bob but with a longer track record. I think Bob should get closer to $6m long term, especially as he's an RFA.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Or, it could even be that IHZ's reasons for not considering the trade are as or more reasonable than the fantasy hot stove wheeling and dealing regarding Anisimov.

Except he's not saying "I" have a reasonable position that counters "your" reasonable position. He's saying "your" position doesn't make any sense. Which is patently wrong. It is possible for a perspective to be reasonable and to still disagree with it.

Not to mention I believe he's full of **** because he keeps using thee same points and questions.

There is a lot of preoccupation with highly skilled offensive players (like a projected Wennberg) that are pursued at the expense of a well-rounded team. That preoccupation is represented in questioning whether it's better if the Jackets miss the playoffs so they can win the lottery, in the received wisdom that Jared Boll is doesn't have a role on this team, and that Anisimov becomes expendable if/when Wennberg emerges.

You might feel comfortable conflating a bunch of opinions on disparate topics that run counter to your way of thinking as a way to help you sleep at night. I'll stick to discussing the topic at hand, which is that it's perfectly reasonable to consider the possibility that you might be able to improve the team next offseason, or hell, even right now, by trading Anisimov, depending on the return. And yes, Wennberg's progress would likely be a factor - and no, it would not of necessity be at the "expense of a well rounded team."

Why, in your scenario, is Wennberg only a "highly-skilled offensive player" and not "well-rounded" himself? You don't think Wennberg's readiness would be, in part, based on his well-roundedness? And I'm struggling to find people gleefully tossing aside Anisimov ("expendable") because they found some shiny new toy.

You want to disagree with a position or opinion, fine. Disagree with it, and explain your opposition and, better yet, your alternative. But to say a reasonable position "doesn't make sense" when it clearly does is disingenuous and lazy.

 

[db2011]

Except he's not saying "I" have a reasonable position that counters "your" reasonable position. He's saying "your" position doesn't make any sense. Which is patently wrong. It is possible for a perspective to be reasonable and to still disagree with it.

Not to mention I believe he's full of **** because he keeps using thee same points and questions.

Meh. It's a style thing IMO. And I read what you call full of **** as being consistent.

You might feel comfortable conflating a bunch of opinions on disparate topics that run counter to your way of thinking as a way to help you sleep at night. I'll stick to discussing the topic at hand, which is that it's perfectly reasonable to consider the possibility that you might be able to improve the team next offseason, or hell, even right now, by trading Anisimov, depending on the return. And yes, Wennberg's progress would likely be a factor - and no, it would not of necessity be at the "expense of a well rounded team."

Why, in your scenario, is Wennberg only a "highly-skilled offensive player" and not "well-rounded" himself? You don't think Wennberg's readiness would be, in part, based on his well-roundedness? And I'm struggling to find people gleefully tossing aside Anisimov ("expendable") because they found some shiny new toy.

You want to disagree with a position or opinion, fine. Disagree with it, and explain your opposition and, better yet, your alternative. But to say a reasonable position "doesn't make sense" when it clearly does is disingenuous and lazy.

If your sleep suggestion is a way of invalidating my opinion about certain things, so be it. I sleep just fine and to me it's pretty obvious. And I'm struggling just as much to find anyone against trading Anisimov or just about anyone for the right return.

Regarding Wennberg, I'm not suggesting he's not or couldn't wind up being "well-rounded", by which I'll assume we agree translates to effective in all 3 zones/responsible defensively. What I meant by what I said is that he seems to project to be a better player offensively than Anisimov.

 

[pete goegan]

... I read what you call full of **** as being consistent.

I agree with you both.

 

[db2011]

I agree with you both.

bravo, Pete, good one

 

[punk_o_holic]

Probably not a comparable. He's never played more than 51 games.

We're looking at anywhere between 7-8 million for Bob.

If it's 7 to 8 million for Bob, I would rather wait until next Summer. If we lock him up now and he has an average year, that contract will look brutal. I don't think it will be $7 to $8 million though. Schneider signed based on him becoming a UFA vs Bob would sign as a RFA. Rask is getting $7 mil, Lundqvist is getting $8.5, and Price is at $6.5. I would say $6 to $6.5 is more then fair(although $6 million would only be a slight raise so he might not be pleased on that). Now his agent might argue with the cap going up, players salaries will go up and might push for $7 million.

 

[major major]

If it's 7 to 8 million for Bob, I would rather wait until next Summer. If we lock him up now and he has an average year, that contract will look brutal. I don't think it will be $7 to $8 million though. Schneider signed based on him becoming a UFA vs Bob would sign as a RFA. Rask is getting $7 mil, Lundqvist is getting $8.5, and Price is at $6.5. I would say $6 to $6.5 is more then fair(although $6 million would only be a slight raise so he might not be pleased on that). Now his agent might argue with the cap going up, players salaries will go up and might push for $7 million.

I agree, there's no hurry to offer Bob a huge deal. Though I'd be pleased with anything in the $6m range. Anything higher and we can wait.

 

[EspenK]

I agree, there's no hurry to offer Bob a huge deal. Though I'd be pleased with anything in the $6m range. Anything higher and we can wait.

Reminds me of an old joke.

Bob: of course I'd sign another bridge for 10 mill a year

Jarmo: well how about 2 more at 6

Bob: 6? what kind of term do you think I deserve?

Jarmo: We've already established that ,now we're just haggling over price

 

[major major]

Reminds me of an old joke.

Bob: of course I'd sign another bridge for 10 mill a year

Jarmo: well how about 2 more at 6

Bob: 6? what kind of term do you think I deserve?

Jarmo: We've already established that ,now we're just haggling over price

G.B. Shaw, I think.

Jarmo should try that trick on Joey.

 

[Kev22]

Captain Obvious here, but the HF trade board has become utterly unreadable. We can't get Joey signed fast enough. They should change the name of that board in the summer time to the troll board. Good grief.

 

[IHeartZherdev*]

I agree, there's no hurry to offer Bob a huge deal. Though I'd be pleased with anything in the $6m range. Anything higher and we can wait.

The longer we wait, the more the price will go up.

 

[Tonysil]

The longer we wait, the more the price will go up.

Can Bob go to arbitration next year? I'd imagine if he did that he'd get a 10% raise for one year then you'd never see him again.

 

[EspenK]

Can Bob go to arbitration next year? I'd imagine if he did that he'd get a 10% raise for one year then you'd never see him again.

I believe he is.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

If your sleep suggestion is a way of invalidating my opinion about certain things, so be it. I sleep just fine and to me it's pretty obvious. And I'm struggling just as much to find anyone against trading Anisimov or just about anyone for the right return.

Regarding Wennberg, I'm not suggesting he's not or couldn't wind up being "well-rounded", by which I'll assume we agree translates to effective in all 3 zones/responsible defensively. What I meant by what I said is that he seems to project to be a better player offensively than Anisimov.

Am not interested in invalidating your opinions, but I felt like you inserting those other topics in this discussion distracted from the topic at hand. And I'm glad you sleep well - was kind of a garbage comment be me do as not to have to hit on those other topics.

So we're in agreement that the possibility of trading Anisimov makes sense?

 

[major major]

How ready is Wennberg to take a job this year.... at center?

 

[WannabeFinn]

How ready is Wennberg to take a job this year.... at center?

We'll need to wait til training camp to really see. I think he's definitely got the size for it, though. Just a matter of proving he deserves a center spot over Anisimov or maybe Dubinsky. I don't mention Letestu or Johansen for the obvious reasons.

 

[Xoggz22]

I think Wennberg starts on the wing like every other high end CBJ prospect the Las couple years, if, if he makes the team. I think Jenner moves to C before Wennberg.

 

[WannabeFinn]

I think Wennberg starts on the wing like every other high end CBJ prospect the Las couple years, if, if he makes the team. I think Jenner moves to C before Wennberg.

I might be one of few who thinks this, but I kinda don't see Jenner ever moving back to center permanently. I think he'd be better utilized as a top 6 winger than he would be if he played 3rd line center (even if we somehow moved on from Anisimov and Dubinsky, I still see Wennberg as filling in behind Joey over Jenner.. Dano would be a better fit for 3C than Jenner, I think, down the line)

 

[db2011]

Am not interested in invalidating your opinions, but I felt like you inserting those other topics in this discussion distracted from the topic at hand. And I'm glad you sleep well - was kind of a garbage comment be me do as not to have to hit on those other topics.

So we're in agreement that the possibility of trading Anisimov makes sense?

IMO, "the possibility of trading Anisimov" doesn't make sense on its face. He's too important to the team. You can engage in these fantasy GM mental exercises, but I wouldn't confuse them with making sense.

In a vacuum, the possibility of trading lots of guys "for the right return" is valid. But talk of trading a guy who contributes a lot to the team because of a prospect deserves scrutiny. Maybe I'm wrong but the discussion surrounding trading Anisimov seems to center (ahem) on Wennberg's displacing him, and I prefer to wait on that. Wennberg is still a prospect. Have you counted how many times he says "like" in an interview?!

I will say Wennberg looked great in the 3-on-3 tourney, and he was noticeably responsible in his own end. So there's that. There's still too much to learn, but that's a feather in his cap.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

How ready is Wennberg to take a job this year.... at center?

If he's good at faceoffs, right away. Anisimov is known to be real hot and cold at the draw. If he's no better than AA at draws, then stick him to wing.

 

[EspenK]

IMO, "the possibility of trading Anisimov" doesn't make sense on its face. He's too important to the team. You can engage in these fantasy GM mental exercises, but I wouldn't confuse them with making sense.

In a vacuum, the possibility of trading lots of guys "for the right return" is valid. But talk of trading a guy who contributes a lot to the team because of a prospect deserves scrutiny. Maybe I'm wrong but the discussion surrounding trading Anisimov seems to center (ahem) on Wennberg's displacing him, and I prefer to wait on that. Wennberg is still a prospect. Have you counted how many times he says "like" in an interview?!

I will say Wennberg looked great in the 3-on-3 tourney, and he was noticeably responsible in his own end. So there's that. There's still too much to learn, but that's a feather in his cap.

Once while taking a bus to the airport in Boston, these two teenage said like, like a 100 times before I quit counting. OMG, they were, like so not ready, for the NHL either.

And to keep the controversy alive, I don't get the utter disdain for THINKING not advocating, that Anisimov could be a logical trade candidate sometime after this season. There are several reasons-
1)cap room
2)roster space
3)a possible overabundance of centers if Wennberg lives up to expectations

 

[pete goegan]

..Have you counted how many times he says "like" in an interview?!...

Once while taking a bus to the airport in Boston, these two teenage said like, like a 100 times before I quit counting. OMG, they were, like so not ready, for the NHL either...

I figured that, being European, Wennberg was just trying to sound like a brain-dead American teen. If so, he's succeeded.