Confirmed with Link: CBJ Re-Sign Jones [6 years, 5.4M AAV]

[Crede777]

So did Kerby Rychel.

Ultimately, I think it's more a matter of individual personalities than anything. Ryan Murray conducts himself a certain way a similar way as Jones, but didn't grow up with pro athletes in his family. Nick Foligno is similar, but did grow up with pro athletes.

That's a good point MB. Definitely I think personality is most of it.

However, I think Rychel reinforces the point rather than contradicts it. Rychel had an obvious disagreement with management on how he was being utilized. However, there are some things to note:

1. Much of the dispute took place between CBJ management and Rychel's father and his agent. From all the rumors and reports, it doesn't sound like Kerby himself said very much.

2. Kerby never allowed his off-ice dispute to affect his on-ice play. He stayed in shape, never was scratched for a lack of effort, and seemed to be fully engaged when called up. Nobody can accuse him of coasting or taking shifts off. He was engaged all the way through the playoffs and was obviously well liked by all of his teammates.

I contrast this with Johansen. Both had a sense of entitlement. However, Johansen infamously showed up to camp out of shape. He was scratched late in the season in the AHL for a lack of effort. He was open and candid with the media regarding his stance on "me versus the team" when his contract dispute was going on.

3. I admit there's a belief that Rychel sat out longer than necessary due to concussion. However, for a player his age, I think extra caution is warranted and necessary. Besides, this belief isn't exactly something that comes with a citation or even a twitter link. It's speculation based upon the fact that Rychel sat out about a month after he was greenlit by CBJ medical staff. But that situation isn't at all unique in the NHL (Crosby for instance was out long after he was medically cleared to return). Concussions are nasty things and affect every player differently.

I'm not saying Jones should never disagree with management. As a cornerstone of the franchise, I think he can (and should). Obviously it's best if he and management are in agreement, but if he thinks something needs to change, he should voice his opinion.

But like Rychel, Jones knows that he cannot let a disagreement undermine his on-ice efforts. We all can agree, I think, that it wasn't so much Johansen's attitude that got him traded. It was that his attitude affected his on-ice production. While I cannot imagine the battle that would ensue for Johansen's next contract, if he had been on a 30 goal pace this season, I doubt he gets moved when he did.

It's entirely likely that Rychel begins the season with the Toronto Marlies. Instead of giving up, I expect he'll work hard and play his best. If that warrants a call up and/or spot in the Maple Leafs' top-6, then so be it.

As for personality differences, I completely agree. Here, it is best to compare Milano's attitude versus Rychel's. Milano was drafted a year after Rychel and, so far, has been given about the same opportunity to make the NHL. He's stuck behind a log jam. But instead of saying "I was a first round pick and I DESERVE it," Milano is going to the prospects camp. He's working hard. And if/when he starts out in the AHL this season, he's one of the guys the team will rely on for leadership and production.

 

[EspenK]

Don't revisionist history this; JK basically shouted from the rooftops that he was searching for a #1 D and they talked about Jones for a while. It took Johansen to get the deal done, that wasn't JK's first offer.

Yes, they might have wanted to move Johansen but they had been looking for that #1 D for a while. He was looking at multiple teams.

From a pure value perspective, we didn't get full market value for Johansen.

If Joey was worth full market potential he wouldn't have been traded.
He wasn't 70 point Joey when he was traded- he was floating, out of shape, whatever Joey.

Getting Jones for him was a great deal. And may turn out that way for Nashville too.

 

[Jackets16]

Jones may not be on their level, but I like his contract so much more than the contracts Hedman and Eklbad got.

 

[NotWendell]

If Joey was worth full market potential he wouldn't have been traded.
He wasn't 70 point Joey when he was traded- he was floating, out of shape, whatever Joey.

Getting Jones for him was a great deal. And may turn out that way for Nashville too.

Change of venue, wake up call for Joey. Change of opportunity for Jones. Six months later, it's still a potential win-win!

 

[major major]

Don't revisionist history this; JK basically shouted from the rooftops that he was searching for a #1 D and they talked about Jones for a while. It took Johansen to get the deal done, that wasn't JK's first offer.

Yes, they might have wanted to move Johansen but they had been looking for that #1 D for a while. He was looking at multiple teams.

From a pure value perspective, we didn't get full market value for Johansen.

"Market Value" is based on the prices on the market. And what's happened on the market is Hall got traded for Larsson and Johansen got traded for Seth Jones. What other trades are there involving top tier young F's for top tier young D? I'm not interested in what you think they're worth, I want to know what trades you're basing this "market value" on.

It was like watching in real time the way that baseball GMs used to do things, where they'd publicly railroad a player they wanted to trade so that it was more palatable for the public when a move was inevitably made. It didn't matter whether the player was productive or not, and they usually didn't care if it negatively affected the trade return; they wanted the public to turn on a player.

As far as I'm concerned, they did work to protect Johansen's image, not the other way around.

The guy left the team in the middle of a road trip, and had to be escorted home by a trainer. The response from guys around the league was that Joey was afraid of Torts - at least I can remember that from Ray Ferraro. The FO managed to avoid fielding questions on that and steered it to "searching for answers for his energy issues." Now that might have been really what it was, I don't know (I suspect a combination of both).

 

[blahblah]

If Joey was worth full market potential he wouldn't have been traded.
He wasn't 70 point Joey when he was traded- he was floating, out of shape, whatever Joey.

Getting Jones for him was a great deal. And may turn out that way for Nashville too.

Of course. NJ got that floating, out-of-shape Hall. I'll let you reconsider your fallacy.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

Nice signing, I really like what Seth Jones brings to the ice. Him & Ryan Murray have the potential to be the best blue line duo/tandem in the game one day.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

Nice signing, I really like what Seth Jones brings to the ice. Him & Ryan Murray have the potential to be the best blue line duo/tandem in the game one day.

Forgot about Zach Werenski, he's another Blue Jacket dman that has the potential to be a star.

 

[blahblah]

"Market Value" is based on the prices on the market. And what's happened on the market is Hall got traded for Larsson and Johansen got traded for Seth Jones. What other trades are there involving top tier young F's for top tier young D? I'm not interested in what you think they're worth, I want to know what trades you're basing this "market value" on.

Sweet, so teams knowing other teams are desperate isn't a reason for fluctuations in value? I've enjoyed you narrowing the criteria down, instead of considering things like history and production.

Historically teams have paid a premium for certain attributes. Jones was acquired on the potential of those attributes and Larsson was just acquired because he can play 25+ minutes a night and Edmonton's been looking for that and are desperate.

If you believe that Hall for Larsson will become a "reset" for how you value potential PPG wingers over limited production top pairing D I think you'll be sadly disappointed. The Jones for Johansen deal was far closer than that one and just didn't push the issue. The only reason it was really even all that close was because of Johansen's baggage. A legit, young, top line center who has elite skills nets more than a young D with top pairing potential the vast majority of the time.

Also let's not dismiss, in Johansen's case, any influence contributed by his PITA agent. I didn't look, but based on how painless the Jones deal was I don't think we were dealing with the same agent.

I only said "not full value" and I certainly didn't indicate in the Jones for Johansen deal that it was grievous.

There are a whole host of factors outside of player for player, position for position that go into making deals like this.

 

[EspenK]

Also let's not dismiss, in Johansen's case, any influence contributed by his PITA agent. I didn't look, but based on how painless the Jones deal was I don't think we were dealing with the same agent.

Nope. Jones is with CAA not Overhard

 

[major major]

Sweet, so teams knowing other teams are desperate isn't a reason for fluctuations in value? I've enjoyed you narrowing the criteria down, instead of considering things like history and production.

Historically teams have paid a premium for certain attributes. Jones was acquired on the potential of those attributes and Larsson was just acquired because he can play 25+ minutes a night and Edmonton's been looking for that and are desperate.

If you believe that Hall for Larsson will become a "reset" for how you value potential PPG wingers over limited production top pairing D I think you'll be sadly disappointed. The Jones for Johansen deal was far closer than that one and just didn't push the issue. The only reason it was really even all that close was because of Johansen's baggage. A legit, young, top line center who has elite skills nets more than a young D with top pairing potential the vast majority of the time.

Also let's not dismiss, in Johansen's case, any influence contributed by his PITA agent. I didn't look, but based on how painless the Jones deal was I don't think we were dealing with the same agent.

I only said "not full value" and I certainly didn't indicate in the Jones for Johansen deal that it was grievous.

There are a whole host of factors outside of player for player, position for position that go into making deals like this.

You'd think they would, I certainly did. But I'm still waiting to hear about those deals. In the only deals I can think of (the two this year), the more established topline forward was indeed traded for a potential #1 D. I'm open to the possibility that these were just weird anomalies owing to all the other factors you mention - but then show me the other deals that are more stereotypical.

To get back to your first paragraph, "Knowing that teams are desperate" absolutely is part of what sets market value. How many times have we heard GM's say "There just weren't D available"? And that scarcity is not an exception to market value, it is the market. You can put it on a supply and demand graph.

 

[blahblah]

You'd think they would, I certainly did. But I'm still waiting to hear about those deals.

Sweet I'll bring this up in another decade when we get what you consider another comparable. But hey, if you want to think potential is valued the same as established - more power to you.

 

[LetsGOJackets!!]

I've long given up caring about "growing the game". There's plenty of fans. One of the most annoying thing about US hockey coverage is how pedantic it is. It's entirely aimed at getting that marginal new fan, and it makes for painful viewing for experienced fans to hear the same basics over and over again. Going back to Canadian TV is such a relief.

W/O the Players association arbitrated increase the cap would have gone down.. it is being kept up artificially and is not sustainable. It isn't my money, but I don't want to have to lose a few players due to insanity.

 

[Crede777]

So something occurred to me today. I think Seth Jones is the anti-Jack Johnson. Watching Jones play, he doesn't really stand out (neither good nor bad). But his advanced stats are amazing. This is opposite Johnson who usually looks very good on the ice but has horrendous possession stats.

 

[major major]

So something occurred to me today. I think Seth Jones is the anti-Jack Johnson. Watching Jones play, he doesn't really stand out (neither good nor bad). But his advanced stats are amazing. This is opposite Johnson who usually looks very good on the ice but has horrendous possession stats.

I think we all see different things.

I can't get my eyes off Jones when he's out there. Amazing skating and he makes good decisions really fast. He's also a better, faster rusher than JJ. I'm not sure if JJ has any advantage over Jones other than strength. JJ's shooting and passing accuracy are both abysmal - that's what I usually notice when I see him.

 

[blahblah]

Yeah, I agree with mm on this one. Jones is quite noticable out there, he has a skill set that is different than what we have on the team.

 

[Crede777]

Yeah, I agree with mm on this one. Jones is quite noticable out there, he has a skill set that is different than what we have on the team.

I disagree. Jones looked OK for a defensemen, but looked great primarily because the rest were playing so poorly.

He made plays like I would expect of a top-4, but didn't consistently look like an elite defensemen.

Hopefully he takes the next step and his play tracks along with his stats.

 

[major major]

I disagree. Jones looked OK for a defensemen, but looked great primarily because the rest were playing so poorly.

He made plays like I would expect of a top-4, but didn't consistently look like an elite defensemen.

Hopefully he takes the next step and his play tracks along with his stats.

Consistent elite guy? Well certainly not yet.

Eye-popping skill-set? Yes. That's what I was saying. We don't all have to see the same things, but Jones should catch your eye pretty easy.

 

[hardkorejackets]

I'll have to disagree here.. I think Jones was VERY NOTICEABLE in the games I saw live. His skating and passing ability was something that I have never seen from a Blue Jackets defenseman. I enjoy watching him on the ice to be honest. I do think he has the potential to be a Top pairing D-man. Hoping he further improves and becomes more consistent this year.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Dynamic skills. Potential dynamic player.

 

[db2011]

Don't know if this is the place to put this, but I'm very enthusiastic about our D now with Murray, Jones, and Werenski. I loved Joey, but to set that aside for a moment, one of the fundamental positives of this team is that we have those 3 guys on the blue line.

 

[CBJx614]

Don't know if this is the place to put this, but I'm very enthusiastic about our D now with Murray, Jones, and Werenski. I loved Joey, but to set that aside for a moment, one of the fundamental positives of this team is that we have those 3 guys on the blue line.

I think having those 3 will also push/help Savard as well

If Bob and the D can stay healthy, that back end is gonna have a huge season.

 

[db2011]

I think having those 3 will also push/help Savard as well

If Bob and the D can stay healthy, that back end is gonna have a huge season.

Really need Bob to step up this season, good D or bad D.

But I also like points people are making about JJ as a third pairing guy. I've been down on him in the past, but if those 3 allow him to slot into a more appropriate role, he could potentially really help this team.

He seems like one of those guys, and this team has 2 or 3, whose value could especially become apparent in the playoffs. Here's hoping we can confirm that this year!

 

[Crede777]

Consistent elite guy? Well certainly not yet.

Eye-popping skill-set? Yes. That's what I was saying. We don't all have to see the same things, but Jones should catch your eye pretty easy.

I guess I'll just have to agree to disagree then. Jones wasn't particularly eye popping to me this past season. Good, not great. Nothing like "gee that's amazing." He was better than any of the other defensemen at skating the puck, but again that's just because the others were so bad.

When I think of really good defensive puck movers, I think of Karlsson, Subban, Burns and Hedman.

Thinking back I was impressed with Wennberg's ability to skate the puck in transition (he was basically the only guy on the team who could get a pass in the skates and transition it to his stick while moving). But otherwise, nobody really stood out (including Jones). If anything, Jones didn't get enough chances to skate the puck, especially not on the powerplay. On the powerplay it was always Murray with a drop pass to a forward or Johnson trying to skate it in.

 

[Xoggz22]

Really need Bob to step up this season, good D or bad D.

But I also like points people are making about JJ as a third pairing guy. I've been down on him in the past, but if those 3 allow him to slot into a more appropriate role, he could potentially really help this team.

He seems like one of those guys, and this team has 2 or 3, whose value could especially become apparent in the playoffs. Here's hoping we can confirm that this year!

The most appropriate role for JJ is 2nd pair LHD. If Murray and Jones can handle and excel with top pair minutes and assignments that will provide JJ with ideal 2nd pair matchups and protect Werenski on the 3rd pair. JJ is not a 3rd pair dman.