Line Combos: CBJ Roster Discussion/Line Combos/Injury Report

[cbjthrowaway]

Risk aversion and asymmetric information. GMs don't want to risk being "that idiot who traded for a broken player". And what does it tell you if a team with a frequently injured player is very willing to trade him to you?

as talented and likable of a player as he is, he's often out of the lineup, and streaky when he's in it. the tools are louder than the production. and the FO is reportedly frustrated with the player.

this FO quickly dropped a bunch of guys (laine, boqvist, texier, jiricek, bean) who checked similar boxes (talent, uncertainty, tension) precisely because of the risk aversion you mentioned. not necessarily the same situation across the board, but there's some overlap.

if they keep chinakhov, they have a piece that:

1. is cheap for one more year, when they won't need the cap space
2. is capable of playing like a top six forward, but
3. is streaky when he's in the lineup
4. is often out of the lineup

there are plenty of teams that will want to bet on his upside as a supporting piece, especially given the cap hit. for the jackets, he's the means to an end. they can move him to fill a need without opening another.

assuming no provorov extension, they need a top four defenseman. imo they also need another top six forward. i'd argue that bundling chinakhov with a 1st + prospect to go big game hunting for one of those needs, then filling the second via UFA creates a stronger roster than keeping him and only filling one of those needs externally.

 

[majormajor]

as talented and likable of a player as he is, he's often out of the lineup, and streaky when he's in it. the tools are louder than the production. and the FO is reportedly frustrated with the player.

this FO quickly dropped a bunch of guys (laine, boqvist, texier, jiricek, bean) who checked similar boxes (talent, uncertainty, tension) precisely because of the risk aversion you mentioned. not necessarily the same situation across the board, but there's some overlap.

if they keep chinakhov, they have a piece that:

1. is cheap for one more year, when they won't need the cap space
2. is capable of playing like a top six forward, but
3. is streaky when he's in the lineup
4. is often out of the lineup

there are plenty of teams that will want to bet on his upside as a supporting piece, especially given the cap hit. for the jackets, he's the means to an end. they can move him to fill a need without opening another.

assuming no provorov extension, they need a top four defenseman. imo they also need another top six forward. i'd argue that bundling chinakhov with a 1st + prospect to go big game hunting for one of those needs, then filling the second via UFA creates a stronger roster than keeping him and only filling one of those needs externally.

By all means go trade for a big defensive upgrade (I'm not persuaded that we should move trade assets for a top six forward), I just don't think Chinakhov's trade value is high enough to be the best candidate for that sort of trade. Obviously a more complicated case, but we had to pay to move Laine, largely because of his injury history. A team acquiring Chinakhov is going to think through why we'd be so willing to move him and what it's going to look like if he can't play for them.

 

[KJ Dangler]

It is true that a lot of players have stopped scoring as much as they usually do when Sillinger is on the bench. Make of that what you will.

I don't know which line you are referring to. What line was he on?

Plain and simple to see .. with Boone trying to center your 2nd line , they basically have become a one line team , and that’s usually the Fantilli line .
When Sillinger went down it was a huge blow to our offense . Basically to beat us now , you focus on shutting down the Fantilli line

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

Not sure if this is just so Elvis can stay home another night with his new baby while one of the others plays the 2nd night of the B2B.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Not sure if this is just so Elvis can stay home another night with his new baby while one of the others plays the 2nd night of the B2B.

That’s my guess. I’m hoping all is healthy with baby Jaxon and Elvis wife.

 

[VT]

Boone Jenner:

first 4 games back from injury: 0 g 7 a +7

last 6 games: 0 g 2 a -7

The first game played on adrenaline. It's understandable that he doesn't play well, especially if the rest of the team doesn't shine either, honor the exceptions.

 

[VT]

as talented and likable of a player as he is, he's often out of the lineup, and streaky when he's in it. the tools are louder than the production. and the FO is reportedly frustrated with the player.

this FO quickly dropped a bunch of guys (laine, boqvist, texier, jiricek, bean) who checked similar boxes (talent, uncertainty, tension) precisely because of the risk aversion you mentioned. not necessarily the same situation across the board, but there's some overlap.

if they keep chinakhov, they have a piece that:

1. is cheap for one more year, when they won't need the cap space
2. is capable of playing like a top six forward, but
3. is streaky when he's in the lineup
4. is often out of the lineup

there are plenty of teams that will want to bet on his upside as a supporting piece, especially given the cap hit. for the jackets, he's the means to an end. they can move him to fill a need without opening another.

assuming no provorov extension, they need a top four defenseman. imo they also need another top six forward. i'd argue that bundling chinakhov with a 1st + prospect to go big game hunting for one of those needs, then filling the second via UFA creates a stronger roster than keeping him and only filling one of those needs externally.

I wrote a long time ago that we should trade Chinakhov because of injuries. Unfortunately, what I feared happened.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

By all means go trade for a big defensive upgrade (I'm not persuaded that we should move trade assets for a top six forward),

they should absolutely be in the market for a top six forward, and there are ways to pursue one without parting with meaningful assets. whether that's a UFA like ehlers or a cap casualty trade.

another wrinkle to this as it pertains to chinakhov is that he only has one more cheap year left on his deal. if they bet on him and they're wrong, it's a wasted season. if they bet on him and they're right, they're going to have to pay up and still have the lingering injury uncertainty.

i'd argue there's a really strong case for instead pursuing a trade for a winger who:

• signed their current deal before the cap increase projections came out
• has multiple years of term left on that deal
• is more consistent + reliable (both in terms of performance + injuries)

even if that player doesn't have the supposed upside of chinakhov, that would still put the team itself in a stronger position imo. trevor moore sticks out as an option, with a $4m cap hit for three more years after this one.

there's an even bolder path where they look for a bona fide upgrade over chinakhov, whether that's via trade (kyrou, mccann, buchnevich), free agency (ehlers, duchene, maybe boeser) or offer sheet (viliardi, peterka, foerster). if it's not a trade, chinkahov could be dangled to recoup assets or wrangle a defensive upgrade.

I just don't think Chinakhov's trade value is high enough to be the best candidate for that sort of trade.

on his own? of course not. but the "draft pick + young roster player + prospect" template can fetch a pretty big fish. chinakhov is valuable enough to move the needle in a package like that over, say, what alex texier's value was last year.

 

[Doggy]

Quick read on Monahan, Guddy and Silly:

Blue Jackets Monahan, Gudbranson, Sillinger All Close to a Return - The Hockey Writers Columbus Blue Jackets Latest News, Analysis & More

The Columbus Blue Jackets are close to getting to full strength. Hear from Sean Monahan, Erik Gudbranson and Cole Sillinger.

thehockeywriters.com

 

[majormajor]

they should absolutely be in the market for a top six forward, and there are ways to pursue one without parting with meaningful assets. whether that's a UFA like ehlers or a cap casualty trade.

another wrinkle to this as it pertains to chinakhov is that he only has one more cheap year left on his deal. if they bet on him and they're wrong, it's a wasted season. if they bet on him and they're right, they're going to have to pay up and still have the lingering injury uncertainty.

i'd argue there's a really strong case for instead pursuing a trade for a winger who:

• signed their current deal before the cap increase projections came out
• has multiple years of term left on that deal
• is more consistent + reliable (both in terms of performance + injuries)

even if that player doesn't have the supposed upside of chinakhov, that would still put the team itself in a stronger position imo. trevor moore sticks out as an option, with a $4m cap hit for three more years after this one.

there's an even bolder path where they look for a bona fide upgrade over chinakhov, whether that's via trade (kyrou, mccann, buchnevich), free agency (ehlers, duchene, maybe boeser) or offer sheet (viliardi, peterka, foerster). if it's not a trade, chinkahov could be dangled to recoup assets or wrangle a defensive upgrade.


on his own? of course not. but the "draft pick + young roster player + prospect" template can fetch a pretty big fish. chinakhov is valuable enough to move the needle in a package like that over, say, what alex texier's value was last year.

If we're making a big trade for a defensive upgrade at D (I insist!) then I might be interested in a forward acquisition as well, depending on who is available and how much trade capital we have left over. It's certainly a much lower priority.

There's a risk that you're trading Chinakhov+ for someone who Chinakhov will outplay immediately.

Some of these guys you talk about like Brock Boeser are even more dependent on getting top minutes and PP time - it's been a topic in Vancouver that Boeser can't seem to score unless his center is really playing well. And of course he has his own health risks.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Ehlers is who I would target if we’re looking at a forward upgrade in UFA (assuming Marner isn’t possible)

 

[NotCommitted]

So no other team will take a risk on Chinakov because of his back issues while ignoring his upside as a player while we should do the opposite?

I mean if he was playing somewhere else, what would you be willing to give in a trade for a player who has at most played 53 games the past 3 seasons and on his best year to date is on pace for something like 20g+20a per 82, but whose actual statline will be more like 10+10=20 in 40gp? Probably not much? Would you rather get that return or take your chances on Chinakhov staying healthy and starting to tap into some of that potential?

We already have the player and know he's a good fit if he stays healthy, so the risk for CBJ in that sense is less than the risk for a team who'd actually have to give back something of value to get him.

 

[majormajor]

Ehlers is who I would target if we’re looking at a forward upgrade in UFA (assuming Marner isn’t possible)

Ehlers is ideal in a lot of ways beyond just being a top line caliber forward. He doesn't need much help. He's spent almost his whole on the 2nd line in Winnipeg and usually wasn't on the top powerplay, and he still produced at a great pace, even with weaker linemates.

I don't want to bring in a guy where we feel strongly obliged to "get him going" and give him attention and PP minutes at the expense of Fantilli, KJ, etc... Certainly if a newcomer is playing better, I don't mind, but the great appeal of Ehlers for me is that he can lift up others and doesn't need to be carried.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Ehlers is ideal in a lot of ways beyond just being a top line caliber forward. He doesn't need much help. He's spent almost his whole on the 2nd line in Winnipeg and usually wasn't on the top powerplay, and he still produced at a great pace, even with weaker linemates.

I don't want to bring in a guy where we feel strongly obliged to "get him going" and give him attention and PP minutes at the expense of Fantilli, KJ, etc... Certainly if a newcomer is playing better, I don't mind, but the great appeal of Ehlers for me is that he can lift up others and doesn't need to be carried.

There’s like no impact players on defense on the market so if you’re going to make an impact on the roster in free agency , then Marner or Ehlers are the best ways to utilize your money for actual impact.

Defensive upgrade (and goalie) would have to Come via trade.

 

[majormajor]

There’s like no impact players on defense on the market so if you’re going to make an impact on the roster in free agency , then Marner or Ehlers are the best ways to utilize your money for actual impact.

Defensive upgrade (and goalie) would have to Come via trade.

Maybe not "impact player" but if we happen to lure Gavrikov back that would be a very big defensive upgrade.

Most likely we'll have to make a big trade or two to fix the back end.

 

[MoeBartoli]

This team needs one more forward. While it may not be Ehlers, he’s a good example of what we could use. This team also needs reliable goaltending. Elvis is too inconsistent and Tarasov is too so not the answer.

But Waddell needs to overhaul the defense. Z is great and Mayetchuck will become a good defensemen. Beyond that everyone else is a question mark for me. Many here are much higher on Provorov. To me he and Severson take turns making poor decisions and poor plays while at other times look good. Too inconsistent - the defensive versions of Elvis. JMFJ is one of my all time favs but he’s washed and has been for several years. Christiansen is a 6,7,8 guy. I’m not totally sold on Fabbro as I wonder if his success is because of his pairing with Z (which makes him workable even if he’s not an ideal top pair guy).

Waddell needs to add a solid defensive D man who has some physicality. Don’t re-sign Provorov, trade Severson if humanly possible, and don’t even think Harris is a solution. This may sound like more of a defensive rebuild than some might like but I believe it’s needed.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Another forward I think we could be in on is Brock Nelson.