GDT: All things training camp

[lanky]

We will be near the bottom of the priority list to claim waived players so the best ones will be gone before we get a shot.

Maybe we can make a low cost trade for a player who will likely be waived otherwise.

Eh. Lots of quality players slip through unclaimed.

Really we're just looking for an upgrade on Haydn Fleury and I think we all know he would clear waivers.

Capobianco, just as an example of an upgrade, cleared waivers last year.

The guys that are most likely to be claimed are former 1st round picks on their way to bust, who are hitting the waiver wire for the first time.

 

[Buffdog]

Eh. Lots of quality players slip through unclaimed.

Really we're just looking for an upgrade on Haydn Fleury and I think we all know he would clear waivers.

Capobianco, just as an example of an upgrade, cleared waivers last year.

The guys that are most likely to be claimed are former 1st round picks on their way to bust, who are hitting the waiver wire for the first time.

GMs have had chances to claim Fleury in the past and have not. They also could have signed him before chevy did

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Eh. Lots of quality players slip through unclaimed.

Really we're just looking for an upgrade on Haydn Fleury and I think we all know he would clear waivers.

Capobianco, just as an example of an upgrade, cleared waivers last year.

The guys that are most likely to be claimed are former 1st round picks on their way to bust, who are hitting the waiver wire for the first time.

Yes, there are usually some pretty good players who clear waivers at this time of year. Few teams are looking to acquire more right now.

But, if we wanted to have our pick we could offer a 7th for a player who is likely to be waived. He might clear and he might not. I certainly wouldn't offer much unless there is a better quality player out there who might be available.

 

[voyageur]

Yes, there are usually some pretty good players who clear waivers at this time of year. Few teams are looking to acquire more right now.

But, if we wanted to have our pick we could offer a 7th for a player who is likely to be waived. He might clear and he might not. I certainly wouldn't offer much unless there is a better quality player out there who might be available.

I think the question is what are you looking for from waivers? A player like Fleury who could clear waivers, maybe (I think there are a few teams that could conceivably upgrade with a player like him) or Lundmark are supposed to be depth defensemen, 8/9 players...If they aren't good enough what is the depth of this team made of?

Realistically if Stan and Heinola come back and you plan on playing them, you are just wasting a draft pick on a player that could conceivably be waived again anyways. Maybe you want that 23rd roster spot open for young players to compete, say you have a player with a nagging injury that doesn't get IR'd that's a way to get a Chibrikov or Lambert into the lineup. Maybe you want to keep JAD.

Personally Fleury wasn't bad enough last night to look at a waiver replacement. His skating led to the 2-2 goal. Lundmark probably deserves a longer look. Miller didn't have a particularly strong game last night, nor did Samberg, but it's still early enough in preseason to shake off rust. Salomonsson looked lost until he got a week of practice, last night he looked a lot closer to being an NHL player than he has at any point.

I do think another injury though on d likely has Chevy on the phone. Because the defense so far only looks 9 deep, with Salomonsson trying to become #10. And 2 down.

 

[voyageur]

GMs have had chances to claim Fleury in the past and have not. They also could have signed him before chevy did

No they have not. He had a conditioning stint for 5 games last year. He's never been on waivers. Was traded to Ducks.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I think the question is what are you looking for from waivers? A player like Fleury who could clear waivers, maybe (I think there are a few teams that could conceivably upgrade with a player like him) or Lundmark are supposed to be depth defensemen, 8/9 players...If they aren't good enough what is the depth of this team made of?

Realistically if Stan and Heinola come back and you plan on playing them, you are just wasting a draft pick on a player that could conceivably be waived again anyways. Maybe you want that 23rd roster spot open for young players to compete, say you have a player with a nagging injury that doesn't get IR'd that's a way to get a Chibrikov or Lambert into the lineup. Maybe you want to keep JAD.

Personally Fleury wasn't bad enough last night to look at a waiver replacement. His skating led to the 2-2 goal. Lundmark probably deserves a longer look. Miller didn't have a particularly strong game last night, nor did Samberg, but it's still early enough in preseason to shake off rust. Salomonsson looked lost until he got a week of practice, last night he looked a lot closer to being an NHL player than he has at any point.

I do think another injury though on d likely has Chevy on the phone. Because the defense so far only looks 9 deep, with Salomonsson trying to become #10. And 2 down.

There's lots of moving parts. Maybe Jets are content with Fleury/Lundmark/Coglan for depth and do nothing.

The thing I am considering is that we have an unexpected vacancy. Maybe there is an opportunity for a small upgrade there. If all that is available is the equivalent of what we have there is no point. Just stand pat and wait it out.

Never thought I would see the day when I was anxious for the return of Stan from IR.

Edit: Not worried about giving up a 7th, or equivalent. That is not much more than a bag of pucks.