Just Not Excited About 2016 / 2017

[Double-Shift Lasse]

So has that changed in last 12 months? Outside of trading RyJo for Jones (which I agree makes the team more balanced) why are you more excited now than last year?

Again I think it's fine to be a fan(atic). But after 16 years I think everyone is tired of the team being a year away. We've always had young depth, witnessed by our draft position every year except the year we traded our 1st for Carter. The only thing Jarmo has done drafting that everyone hangs there hat on is Oliver in the 3rd round, and he has played all of 12 NHL games (so very small sample size).

The big thing to keep in mind about our historical young depth is how many times the young player is better than what he is a few years later with the CBJ (Brule, Brassard, Zherdev, Fritsche, Mason all come to mind as guys who were impressive initially but then almost regressed while they were here). Even a guy like Nash was at his best in 2nd season (offensively), Pascal had injuries, Klesla never progressed but not sure if he was better early on. Filatov I don't think was good early and never really did much. RyJo progressed and regressed, same with Jake? Point being is we've always had young talent. Sometimes it flourished early, then regressed. Other times it never took off. Rare cases (Nash, RyJo, Mason) where it progressed and peaked early, then maybe not a regression but didn't improve after 2-3 seasons.

Bottom line is hopefully the future development is better than our past.

No no no. Our draft position has been hindered because the team has been just not bad enough, remember? And this young depth? Always shoved to the side in favor of some quick-fix plan from the front office.

 

[Forepar]

No no no. Our draft position has been hindered because the team has been just not bad enough, remember? And this young depth? Always shoved to the side in favor of some quick-fix plan from the front office.

Are you Gilda?

And yes, I know you were being sarcastic, even without

 

[Old Guy]

So has that changed in last 12 months? ...

... The only thing Jarmo has done drafting that everyone hangs there hat on is Oliver in the 3rd round, and he has played all of 12 NHL games (so very small sample size).

I disagree. I think Jarmo did a great job with the Wennberg pick. He was selected 14th. There were 5 centers chosen ahead of him in 2013. Since they were chosen higher, you would expect them to be better. They have been thus far.

GP G A
1 MacKinnon 218 59 94
2 Barkov 191 52 67
5 Lindholm 221 37 62
6 Monahan 237 80 79
9 Horvat 150 29 36
14 Wennberg 137 12 48

There were 2 centers chosen after Wennberg. You would expect Wennberg to be better than them so far. He has been.

GP G A
14 Wennberg 137 12 48
21 Gauthier 7 0 1
29 Dickinson 1 1 0

Next - Everybody went ape**** bananas when Jarmo chose PLD over Jesse P this year. I understand because of all the expectations. "They will be forever linked", is what everyone says. But nobody said squat when the Flyers chose Ivan Provorov #7 over Zack Werenski #8 last year. PLD and Pjulaarvi might wind up playing different positions in the NHL. The other example is more apples/apples in my mind. I understand it was further down the board, but this bears closer watching than the other, imo.

And lastly, everyone has always given this franchise a truck load of crap for rushing prospects from the draft to the NHL. Now, when Jarmo wants to let his prospects develop in the minors, win a Calder Cup, and do the right thing, you (in a left-handed way) give him a bunch of crap for OB only playing 14 games.

Which way do you want it? Rush them to the NHL or let them develop? Jarmo has 4 drafts in Columbus and 3 full seasons. Not enough time to fully judge his selection of 17/18 year old, playing a 22-35 year old man's game, in my mind.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Next - Everybody went ape**** bananas when Jarmo chose PLD over Jesse P this year. I understand because of all the expectations. "They will be forever linked", is what everyone says. But nobody said squat when the Flyers chose Ivan Provorov #7 over Zack Werenski #8 last year.

That's because Ivan Provorov was rated better than Werenski by almost everyone in scouting last year. Some even had Provorov better than Hanifin. If Philly would have opted for Werenski over Provorov their fanbase would have gone bananas. Just because Werenski had a great season in the NCAA doesn't mean he's better than Provorov, who had himself a hell of a year too.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

Just because Werenski had a great season in the NCAA doesn't mean he's better than Provorov, who had himself a hell of a year too.

Only one thing is certain: Jack Werenski will be a future Stanley Cup champion, Ivan Provorov won't be.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Only one thing is certain: Jack Werenski will be a future Stanley Cup champion, Ivan Provorov won't be.

Boy you could be really disappointed one day.

 

[DEF]

I, for one, can't wait to see this Jack Werenski guy play!

 

[Monk]

That's because Ivan Provorov was rated better than Werenski by almost everyone in scouting last year. Some even had Provorov better than Hanifin. If Philly would have opted for Werenski over Provorov their fanbase would have gone bananas. Just because Werenski had a great season in the NCAA doesn't mean he's better than Provorov, who had himself a hell of a year too.

Provorov is also handily beating Werenski in a poll on the mains right now, coincidentally.

 

[major major]

Provorov is also handily beating Werenski in a poll on the mains right now, coincidentally.

That seems reputational. Among those who can actually speak on the development of both players it's not one sided.

 

[Mayor Bee]

The big thing to keep in mind about our historical young depth is how many times the young player is better than what he is a few years later with the CBJ (Brule, Brassard, Zherdev, Fritsche, Mason all come to mind as guys who were impressive initially but then almost regressed while they were here). Even a guy like Nash was at his best in 2nd season (offensively), Pascal had injuries, Klesla never progressed but not sure if he was better early on. Filatov I don't think was good early and never really did much. RyJo progressed and regressed, same with Jake? Point being is we've always had young talent. Sometimes it flourished early, then regressed. Other times it never took off. Rare cases (Nash, RyJo, Mason) where it progressed and peaked early, then maybe not a regression but didn't improve after 2-3 seasons.

Bottom line is hopefully the future development is better than our past.

The issues affecting player development pretty much ground to a halt the instant that Todd Richards became coach, so dredging up what happened eons ago under MacLean's reign of error is hardly relevant.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Next - Everybody went ape**** bananas when Jarmo chose PLD over Jesse P this year. I understand because of all the expectations. "They will be forever linked", is what everyone says. But nobody said squat when the Flyers chose Ivan Provorov #7 over Zack Werenski #8 last year. PLD and Pjulaarvi might wind up playing different positions in the NHL. The other example is more apples/apples in my mind. I understand it was further down the board, but this bears closer watching than the other, imo.

Nearly everyone on the planet had Provorov over Werenski, and nearly everyone on the planet had Puljujarvi over Dubois. If Philadelphia had taken Werenski over Provorov, it would be a very different story.

And lastly, everyone has always given this franchise a truck load of crap for rushing prospects from the draft to the NHL. Now, when Jarmo wants to let his prospects develop in the minors, win a Calder Cup, and do the right thing, you (in a left-handed way) give him a bunch of crap for OB only playing 14 games.

"Everyone" being a bunch of yahoos in the media who don't know what they're talking about? No one cares what they think. And among our own fans, I don't really care if they want to talk about "rushing prospects", since that pretty well stopped years ago as well.

The fact is that Bjorkstrand has played 14 NHL games to this point. Four other players taken in the 3rd round of the 2013 draft (as Bjorkstrand was) have played over 50 games, as well as two 4th-rounders.

Which way do you want it? Rush them to the NHL or let them develop? Jarmo has 4 drafts in Columbus and 3 full seasons. Not enough time to fully judge his selection of 17/18 year old, playing a 22-35 year old man's game, in my mind.

Shocking as it may be, there's actually a middle ground between "rushing" and "letting them develop".

That first draft gave him three 1st-rounders. Outside of those, the entire draft has done the following:
12 NHL games, 4 goals, 4 assists, 8 points

The following numbers are equal:
- Number of 2013 draft picks after the 1st who have played NHL games
- Number of 2013 draft picks who the team was about to relinquish their rights to until a message board poster with a stronger knowledge of the CBA than them (me) pointed out publicly that they didn't have to do it

 

[WannabeFinn]

That first draft gave him three 1st-rounders. Outside of Wennberg, the entire draft has done the following:
12 NHL games, 4 goals, 4 assists, 8 points

Are you forgetting about Dano and Rychel playing in the NHL?

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Are you forgetting about Dano and Rychel playing in the NHL?

To better further the argument, we have left off those players as they are no longer with the organization. So their NHL games played do not count, nor do any assets acquired in trade for said players.

 

[Crede777]

I agree that we've heard the same lines in the past "the answer is in the room," "we have a bright future with great prospects." And I know better than to put any stock into it.

The only thing I'll put stock into is winning consistently. Then, and only then, can we say this franchise is any different from what it was in the past. The excuses for not performing may have changed, but so far the results have largely stayed the same.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I agree that we've heard the same lines in the past "the answer is in the room," "we have a bright future with great prospects." And I know better than to put any stock into it.

The only thing I'll put stock into is winning consistently. Then, and only then, can we say this franchise is any different from what it was in the past. The excuses for not performing may have changed, but so far the results have largely stayed the same.

This is totally true and maddening and frustrating.

But if we're going to try to attribute current sucking to historic actions...

 

[Monk]

That seems reputational. Among those who can actually speak on the development of both players it's not one sided.

Oh I agree. Just commenting on the notion that Werenski should have been taken before him.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Are you forgetting about Dano and Rychel playing in the NHL?

To better further the argument, we have left off those players as they are no longer with the organization. So their NHL games played do not count, nor do any assets acquired in trade for said players.

I actually clipped two sentences and missed a correction. The right thing is "That first draft gave him three 1st-rounders. Outside of those, the entire draft has done the following", not "Outside of Wennberg".

 

[Crede777]

This is totally true and maddening and frustrating.

But if we're going to try to attribute current sucking to historic actions...

I wouldn't attribute the current sucking to historic actions, but I also wouldn't discount historic actions.

It's like a tab. The franchise keeps building up costs against the fans. The costs built up by prior regimes don't go away and new regimes inherit them. It's incumbent upon the new regimes to pay off the dues of the past ones.

This isn't a team 4 years in the making. It's one 16 years in the making.

 

[major major]

I actually clipped two sentences and missed a correction. The right thing is "That first draft gave him three 1st-rounders. Outside of those, the entire draft has done the following", not "Outside of Wennberg".

If your point is that it's too early to really judge, then sure.

But that 8 pts in 12 games is actually very good only three years out. There's only 5 guys in rounds 2 through 7 who have more Bjorkstrand's measly 8 pts - Pesce, Janmark, Duclair, Copp, and Andrighetto. None of them have his points per game.

And I don't think getting NHLers out of picks 14, 18, and 27 should just be assumed. You know that. If you look at the hundreds of players available after Wennberg, it's really hard to argue that there's anyone who is better than he is (Theodore, Bjorkstrand, Burakovsky all might end up better). Rychel was not a good pick but showed more than Frederik Gauthier or any number of first rounders who don't have much of an NHL future. By the time you get down to Dano, it's really mostly misses and very few hits. Dickinson, Hartman, Klimchuk, etc...

 

[EspenK]

I disagree. I think Jarmo did a great job with the Wennberg pick. He was selected 14th. There were 5 centers chosen ahead of him in 2013. Since they were chosen higher, you would expect them to be better. They have been thus far.

GP G A
1 MacKinnon 218 59 94
2 Barkov 191 52 67
5 Lindholm 221 37 62
6 Monahan 237 80 79
9 Horvat 150 29 36
14 Wennberg 137 12 48

There were 2 centers chosen after Wennberg. You would expect Wennberg to be better than them so far. He has been.

GP G A
14 Wennberg 137 12 48
21 Gauthier 7 0 1
29 Dickinson 1 1 0

As a practical matter on a ppg basis he is the equal of Horvat and Lindholm so only 3 really doing better.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

That's because Ivan Provorov was rated better than Werenski by almost everyone in scouting last year. Some even had Provorov better than Hanifin. If Philly would have opted for Werenski over Provorov their fanbase would have gone bananas. Just because Werenski had a great season in the NCAA doesn't mean he's better than Provorov, who had himself a hell of a year too.

I'll fess up. I had them Provorov, Hanifin, Werenski.

I now have them Werenski, Provorov, Hanifin

 

[major major]

So has that changed in last 12 months? Outside of trading RyJo for Jones (which I agree makes the team more balanced) why are you more excited now than last year?

Last summer we had Ryan Murray and that was it on the backend. As a stickler for building from the D, that was always a holdup, and I thought they were overrated last summer because of that. I can only get so excited over a bunch of snipers when they don't have at least an average D behind them.

Add Werenski (who has really elevated his value from just a #8 pick) and Jones, and we have 3 top pair / potential top pair guys. That's a hyuuuuge difference in just one year.

Again I think it's fine to be a fan(atic). But after 16 years I think everyone is tired of the team being a year away.

Well I didn't think they were for 16 years, so you're barking up the wrong tree. I do think they are close now, and that's not something I said last summer.

We've always had young depth, witnessed by our draft position every year except the year we traded our 1st for Carter.

You can draft 8th every year for a decade and not end up with the under 24 talent the club has right now. It has never been so deep with potential top line and top pair players.

The big thing to keep in mind about our historical young depth is how many times the young player is better than what he is a few years later with the CBJ (Brule, Brassard, Zherdev, Fritsche, Mason all come to mind as guys who were impressive initially but then almost regressed while they were here). Even a guy like Nash was at his best in 2nd season (offensively), Pascal had injuries, Klesla never progressed but not sure if he was better early on. Filatov I don't think was good early and never really did much. RyJo progressed and regressed, same with Jake? Point being is we've always had young talent. Sometimes it flourished early, then regressed. Other times it never took off. Rare cases (Nash, RyJo, Mason) where it progressed and peaked early, then maybe not a regression but didn't improve after 2-3 seasons.

Bottom line is hopefully the future development is better than our past.

Some of those players are actually successes for the franchise, and some of them are busts. But the important thing here is that you're talking about a dozen years worth of prospects, and it never constituted anywhere near the depth of top pair / top line upside guys we have right now.

Brule and Filatov are both total busts.

Fritsche was always just supposed to be a depth guy. He wouldn't have cracked our top 10 prospects right now.

Nash, RyJo and Zherdev gave the franchise a lot either in terms of trade value or on-ice results or both.

Brassard unfortunately had to be moved for very little, but he's a marginal top line C and that's actually better than par for a #6 OA. Jake is way better than par for a #7.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I wouldn't attribute the current sucking to historic actions, but I also wouldn't discount historic actions.

It's like a tab. The franchise keeps building up costs against the fans. The costs built up by prior regimes don't go away and new regimes inherit them. It's incumbent upon the new regimes to pay off the dues of the past ones.

This isn't a team 4 years in the making. It's one 16 years in the making.

Nothing wrong with that, and I said as much. As a fan, you get to hold that stuff. But you don't get to use it as explanation for stuff when it's just plain wrong. Is all I'm saying.

 

[major major]

There's some room for debate on this, but the general consensus is that on average a player is between 90 and 100% of their peak scoring level from age 24 to 31. That's prime.

Just to give a sense of the top tier young depth we currently have, and to avoid my own personal subjective rankings:

1. How many teams have multiple U24 30 goal scorers? (1 team this year)

2. How many teams have multiple U24 top pair D?* (1-3 teams)

3. How many teams have 3 players voted in the top 25 prospects?** (2 or 3 teams)

The Jackets are the only team in every category, and in some cases the only team in the category. Florida and Edmonton I'd say have better elite talent, and that makes them the best teams in terms of pre-prime talent, but there's no question the Jackets are near the top.


* This is unavoidably subjective, but I'd surprised if Jones and Murray aren't ranked among the top 60 D. Anaheim and Carolina might be included - and ultimately are deserving even if Faulk and Fowler are excluded for being 24.

** Using the main boards prospects poll. It is biased, of course, but not generally in favor of Jackets prospects. Werenski, Dubois, and Bjorkstrand all made the top 25. The Leafs are ahead obviously, and the Flyers might also have 3 top 25 prospects if Konecny gets voted in.



Edited for clarity.

 

[JacketsDavid]

No no no. Our draft position has been hindered because the team has been just not bad enough, remember? And this young depth? Always shoved to the side in favor of some quick-fix plan from the front office.

We've never traded draft picks outside of the Jeff Carter trade. We've always had young depth in the system.
Now we've never had enough elite talent and honestly I don't think we added any elite talent in last 12 month - maybe Dubois proves me wrong?
But the CBJ has never really traded 1st round picks that often. So the talent was in the system.