Odds are 2-3 of them will be. The role depends on them.
Is there a point to this straw man?
CBJ Development Camp 2014
- Thread starter CBJWerenski8
- Start date
Odds are 2-3 of them will be. The role depends on them.
Is there a point to this straw man?
The point is Foligno and Anisimov and Calvert are better now and probably still will be in 2-3 years. I bet 1 maybe 2 are here full time in 3 years. You guys are getting overhyped on our prospects again like it was 5 years ago.
WannabeFinn
Beloved One
I think some people are arguing that players like Foligno would be gone due to $$ issues, not due to being worse than one of our current prospects..
Oh I know. That's the only possible thing you can complain about when it comes to Anisimov and Foligno...that's part of my problem. If the only bad thing you can bring up about a player is how much they might make in a couple years then maybe you should really be looking to keep such players. There's other people on the team that are overpaid NOW and have other issue with their game. But I have to make indirect comments without getting infractions.
Can somebody please make a "Get rid of Foligno and Anisimov" thread so I don't have to read about you guys wanting to "move on" from them in every thread. Its a 2 way street right?
Can somebody please make a "Get rid of Foligno and Anisimov" thread so I don't have to read about you guys wanting to "move on" from them in every thread. Its a 2 way street right?
LetsGOJackets!!
Registered User
? what is your real point here
As a Blue Jacket fan going back to the very beginning I have to ask whether you are a fan of the team or a fan of certain players? At this point I really just want the franchise to win, and to win with whatever players jell to make that happen. I don't care how much they are paid or how much the ownership group makes. Win, and win with one goal in mind.
In any organization that is considered a small market team, you need to win with a roster made up of homegrown and developed talent, but it certainly can be done. There have been times in the past that I have daydreamed about the Hurricanes, (Peter Karmonos) almost became a Columbus franchise - they won a cup - why can't we?
As a Blue Jacket fan going back to the very beginning I have to ask whether you are a fan of the team or a fan of certain players? At this point I really just want the franchise to win, and to win with whatever players jell to make that happen. I don't care how much they are paid or how much the ownership group makes. Win, and win with one goal in mind.
In any organization that is considered a small market team, you need to win with a roster made up of homegrown and developed talent, but it certainly can be done. There have been times in the past that I have daydreamed about the Hurricanes, (Peter Karmonos) almost became a Columbus franchise - they won a cup - why can't we?
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,443
- 92
For me the desire to trade some of the current roster has little to do with not liking them as players or inadequate production. It is trying to fill roster holes. This team lacks top end talent, but is loaded with depth. However due to some really promising prospects it appears that we can, if we want to, trade some of the existing players without losing any of our depth. (and even possibly improving it) As a result I believe it makes sense to put together a package using these "expendable" players to improve the roster by bringing in elite talent.
For example:
Anisimov is a good player, however Wennberg is looking like he is as good with is a few years in hand as well as a higher ceiling. So if Wennberg is superior in camp you can move Anisimov without any drop off in depth performance. This essentially allows you to pursue a legit top line forward or defender without sacrificing the critical depth of our team. So if you were to trade Anisimov, Foligno, a prospect and a pick for a 1st line winger we could upgrade our team without any negative impact to team depth.
For example:
Anisimov is a good player, however Wennberg is looking like he is as good with is a few years in hand as well as a higher ceiling. So if Wennberg is superior in camp you can move Anisimov without any drop off in depth performance. This essentially allows you to pursue a legit top line forward or defender without sacrificing the critical depth of our team. So if you were to trade Anisimov, Foligno, a prospect and a pick for a 1st line winger we could upgrade our team without any negative impact to team depth.
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,841
- 4,558
This conversation again?
Make the young guys take the spots away from Anisimov and Foligno by being superior to them during the regular season. Don't clear space based on what you EXPECT some players to be like in the FUTURE. Operate in the here and now. If Wennberg, Rychel, Dano, etc. spend a while longer in developmental leagues such as the AHL than they perhaps should it isn't the end of the world.
Treat the situation like the captaincy situation. Who the superior player is should be readily apparent before you act. I feel like people are reading way too much into development camps, WJC's, and minor league play.
If you move out an established player for an unestablished, young player you take the risk that you'd be taking a step backwards and that player isn't actually as good. As small of a risk as that may be, it's an unwise one. Focus on Johansen, Murray, Jenner, Calvert, etc. taking more steps forward. After you're comfortable with those guys (1-2 years from now) is when you can start thinking about giving the younger players a significant role on the club.
Make the young guys take the spots away from Anisimov and Foligno by being superior to them during the regular season. Don't clear space based on what you EXPECT some players to be like in the FUTURE. Operate in the here and now. If Wennberg, Rychel, Dano, etc. spend a while longer in developmental leagues such as the AHL than they perhaps should it isn't the end of the world.
Treat the situation like the captaincy situation. Who the superior player is should be readily apparent before you act. I feel like people are reading way too much into development camps, WJC's, and minor league play.
If you move out an established player for an unestablished, young player you take the risk that you'd be taking a step backwards and that player isn't actually as good. As small of a risk as that may be, it's an unwise one. Focus on Johansen, Murray, Jenner, Calvert, etc. taking more steps forward. After you're comfortable with those guys (1-2 years from now) is when you can start thinking about giving the younger players a significant role on the club.
Last edited:
As my parents used to say... What does have to do with the price of tea in China?
Skill doesn't always translate. Get a flippin grip already. I'm usually pretty good at calling out where I think players will land and Jenner, Atkinson, and Calvert were pretty close. What your spewing seems to border on nonsense.
Well, since you're going to go this way.
http://bluejackets.nhl.com/v2/ext/2012/2012DevelopmentCampRoster.pdf
That's the 2012 camp roster.
Atkinson, Jenner, Johansen, Murray, and Prout. So 3 key pieces 1 semi-key piece, and a complementary piece.
So 4 would be less than the 2012 roster. Need to get rid of one more player.
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
could tell Ryo was over his head, but not by that much...skated well, his shot is a bit weird, but over all was impressed by him...
how bout we just wait til camp and see what happens then before we talk about trading a very capable, veteran, playoff-tested center forward for a prospect.
spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 67,454
- 13,290
I wouldn't deal any of the top 9 for prospects. But if the Coyotes wanted to get rid of Yandle (and it sounds like they do), they could put together an intriguing package for him. (something around Foligno/Arty and Prout/Savard)
Johnson
Wiz
Yandle
Murray
Tyutin
Prout/Savard
…that's a pretty impressive group.
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,443
- 92
First off I agree. While Wennberg looked head and shoulders above the others at sea camp no decision should be made until he has been through the 9(?) game trial period.
Secondly, and I am only speaking for myself here, it would be stupid to trade Anisimov for prospects/picks unless the players were top 5 prospects. I advocated trading him based on 2 conditions. (1) Wennberg plays to an equally high level during training camp this year and (2) Anisimov would be part of a package to bring in either a top pairing defenseman or a top line wing. Now I will freely admit to loving the flashier player but this team has one hole IMO, elite level talent. So if we can trade anyone on the roster (and Anisimov/Foligno/Tyutin seem most likely) to fill that hole without losing our team identity or our team depth I will support it.
Is there even a 9 game period when Wennberg would just be going to the AHL?
Here are my thoughts on it? We may, as fans, think he is ready, but we don't know. I am guessing our GM, scouts, and coaches have a really good idea if he is ready. Obviously, they won't be 100% sure one way or the other, but I am confident they have a really good idea, so I am not going to worry about this.
Here are my thoughts on it? We may, as fans, think he is ready, but we don't know. I am guessing our GM, scouts, and coaches have a really good idea if he is ready. Obviously, they won't be 100% sure one way or the other, but I am confident they have a really good idea, so I am not going to worry about this.
Xoggz22
Registered User
It's pretty simple. If you can improve the team short and long term via trade you do it. If a young player shows he can play at the NHL level you find a way to fit him in. If that comes at the expense of a roster player he gets traded. At some point fiscal decisions need to be considered and made. Columbus is not a team that will typically allow players to walk for nothing. You move them for assets when the time is right or you run out of time to keep them in the fold.
I look at the roster and see assets. Where might we have asset depth and where could we use an upgrade. If you want the team to improve, move assets for other assets. Most would agree that adding a top 6 wing would be helpful. If it means moving a player we like but gaining ground on the Cup chase... Go for it.
I look at the roster and see assets. Where might we have asset depth and where could we use an upgrade. If you want the team to improve, move assets for other assets. Most would agree that adding a top 6 wing would be helpful. If it means moving a player we like but gaining ground on the Cup chase... Go for it.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
You're right on as far as wait and see goes but no one at all is advocating trading anisimov for a prospect.
Skinnyjimmy08
WorldTraveler
- Mar 30, 2012
- 22,915
- 12,745
No there is no 9 game rule for him. He can go back and forth throughout the season between AHL and NHL. Everyone is extremely high on him right now from this Development Camp. Just wait until main camp though to make final decisions guys!!.. Sure he is an unbelievable prospect, but he needs to get top minutes and get used to North America. He will play majority of the season in AHL with some NHL callups... no need to rush him!!!
You're right, that was poorly worded. Alpha's post I was quoting offered an example in which Anisimov would be traded for a top 6 winger or top pairing defenseman, a trade made possible due to the emergence of Wennberg to take AA's place- that's where I was getting the "traded for a prospect" bit.
No limits and he's losing a year off that contract anyways (all 3 2013 1sts are)
LetsGOJackets!!
Registered User
Agreed SlimJim
I think what we are hoping for is that right from the beginning Wennberg's play forces him into the lineup & he makes a run at the Calder. Columbus is really due for that type of talent explosion. It may be too much to ask, but that remains what I am hoping for.
I think what we are hoping for is that right from the beginning Wennberg's play forces him into the lineup & he makes a run at the Calder. Columbus is really due for that type of talent explosion. It may be too much to ask, but that remains what I am hoping for.
That is a good looking group, but I'd be concerned about the hole in the top 6 that trade would create. My preference would be for Atkinson to be the forward going the other way, but maybe the cap would prohibit that?
Yes, I didn't mean to imply you were saying to trade Anisimov for a prospect, I didn't make that clear. In your scenario, Anisimov would be replaced by a prospect which is what I should have said. Again, I'd rather include Atkinson in a deal like that to keep Anisimov as further center depth who can play wing and play a strong 2-way game.
Hello Johnny
Registered User
- Apr 13, 2007
- 13,208
- 1,142
CapnCornelius
Registered User
- Oct 28, 2006
- 10,986
- 0
I just have to shake my head about this Anisimov conversation. How it isn't obvious to some that he does not fit in long term is beyond me. We just re-signed Dubi long-term. Johansen will be re-signed before the season starts with a significant raise in a manner that will ensure his next deal is still as an RFA. Jenner played well last year and is a natural center. Wennberg is a center. Its quite possible (maybe even probable) that Jenner surpasses Anisimov this year. Which makes him the 4th line center, even if Wennberg (1) doesn't play center for now or (2) doesn't make the team. And, to be clear, that's only looking ahead to 2014-15.
Does anyone seriously want to tell me that Anisimov is going to be on this team as a center by the time his contract runs out in 2016, two full seasons from now?
So, then we have to look at our other top 6 forward positions. Hartnell and Horton are clearly going to be taking up top 6 minutes. Atkinson would seem likely to be in that position barring a trade particularly since he already outperformed Arty and still has significant upside. That leaves one spot for Foligno/Anisimov in the top 6...this year. And, on a per game, and consistency basis, I'd choose Foligno over Anisimov. Not to mention that Foligno has shown more chemistry with his teammates and better fits the style of play JD and Jarmo want. This is BEFORE we even consider 2 more years of development for guys like Dano, Rychel, etc.
So, are we going to pay Anisimov the type of money he's going to rightly want in 2 years to be a bottom 6 forward...or are we going to maximize the return and trade him sometime between now and then to address other needs--specifically improving our defense which was totally outskated in the series against the Pens?
Anisimov will not be a 1st or 2nd line center for the Jackets going forward...but he could on another team. And that makes him a valuable commodity. More valuable than Foligno and Atkinson, for example. You have to manage assets and trade from strength to address weakness. So, without even thinking that much about the youngsters, I think it is obvious that Anisimov is a trade chip during the next 2 years.
Does anyone seriously want to tell me that Anisimov is going to be on this team as a center by the time his contract runs out in 2016, two full seasons from now?
So, then we have to look at our other top 6 forward positions. Hartnell and Horton are clearly going to be taking up top 6 minutes. Atkinson would seem likely to be in that position barring a trade particularly since he already outperformed Arty and still has significant upside. That leaves one spot for Foligno/Anisimov in the top 6...this year. And, on a per game, and consistency basis, I'd choose Foligno over Anisimov. Not to mention that Foligno has shown more chemistry with his teammates and better fits the style of play JD and Jarmo want. This is BEFORE we even consider 2 more years of development for guys like Dano, Rychel, etc.
So, are we going to pay Anisimov the type of money he's going to rightly want in 2 years to be a bottom 6 forward...or are we going to maximize the return and trade him sometime between now and then to address other needs--specifically improving our defense which was totally outskated in the series against the Pens?
Anisimov will not be a 1st or 2nd line center for the Jackets going forward...but he could on another team. And that makes him a valuable commodity. More valuable than Foligno and Atkinson, for example. You have to manage assets and trade from strength to address weakness. So, without even thinking that much about the youngsters, I think it is obvious that Anisimov is a trade chip during the next 2 years.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread | The Oilers Biggest Roster Need Is?- Latest: KeithIsActuallyBad
-
