Just Not Excited About 2016 / 2017

[JacketsDavid]

Yeah it's our club. Most clubs, even bad ones, are slotting 3-4 new guys in their lineups. So there you go.

And maybe the players weren't there to do "this" "years ago." These rookies aren't, for the most part, your traditional "hope for the best" rookies, but young players at the point in their development at which they have pressed for a spot and presuming they get it will have earned it rather than been given it. This is also a good thing.

Thirdly I'll echo major's point that it's the young existing roster players that should be bringing whatever improvement there is going to be. Wennberg, Jones, Murray, Saad, Jenner. These guys are the core, and they're the ones we should be looking to for improvement, both in their own play and in the team results.

None of this is to say I'm making any predictions. My ongoing use of a bunny with a pancake on its head is a metaphor for my "expectations" for the Jackets - which is to say, I have no idea. I'll just be glad when the games start again.

Difference is a lot of the "hope for the best rookies" are 3rd/4th line players on good teams, where if they produce it's gravy.
Our rookies (also throwing in young players) will be positioned as guys who need to produce for us not to suck. Based on line projections we'll have 3 d-men under 24 in our top 4 (again I argue Wereneski will start on 3rd pair) and a top 6 winger (Oliver).
Again on better teams you ease the young ones in and let me get their feet wet. We won't give them that luxury here. Maybe it's a good thing but it's a major difference when looking at a bunch of young players on other teams.
I'm sure their are exceptions like Toronto and Edmonton may be having same amount of youth coming at same time.

 

[major major]

Difference is a lot of the "hope for the best rookies" are 3rd/4th line players on good teams, where if they produce it's gravy.
Our rookies (also throwing in young players) will be positioned as guys who need to produce for us not to suck. Based on line projections we'll have 3 d-men under 24 in our top 4 (again I argue Wereneski will start on 3rd pair) and a top 6 winger (Oliver).
Again on better teams you ease the young ones in and let me get their feet wet. We won't give them that luxury here. Maybe it's a good thing but it's a major difference when looking at a bunch of young players on other teams.
I'm sure their are exceptions like Toronto and Edmonton may be having same amount of youth coming at same time.

Completely false. We've been over this before. We have 7 top six F before factoring in Bjorkstrand and a full complement of top 4 D before factoring in Werenski.

And our success next year is not all about rookies and what they do. It's about guys in their 2nd through 5th seasons. If the team has a big improvement this coming year it will come from those young guys.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Difference is a lot of the "hope for the best rookies" are 3rd/4th line players on good teams, where if they produce it's gravy.
Our rookies (also throwing in young players) will be positioned as guys who need to produce for us not to suck. Based on line projections we'll have 3 d-men under 24 in our top 4 (again I argue Wereneski will start on 3rd pair) and a top 6 winger (Oliver)..

My Sharks just made the Cup finals and our fans "hope" is that Timo Meier joins the team as a 1st line RW and Marcus Sorensen is a top 9 winger.

So even very good teams will be relying on rookies. Even on the top line.

 

[Samkow]

Yeah it's our club. Most clubs, even bad ones, are slotting 3-4 new guys in their lineups. So there you go.

I just realized, we haven't signed anyone from another organization this summer. Not even a single minor leaguer. This is one boring offseason, even as boring offseasons go.

 

[EspenK]

Difference is a lot of the "hope for the best rookies" are 3rd/4th line players on good teams, where if they produce it's gravy.
Our rookies (also throwing in young players) will be positioned as guys who need to produce for us not to suck. Based on line projections we'll have 3 d-men under 24 in our top 4 (again I argue Wereneski will start on 3rd pair) and a top 6 winger (Oliver).
Again on better teams you ease the young ones in and let me get their feet wet. We won't give them that luxury here. Maybe it's a good thing but it's a major difference when looking at a bunch of young players on other teams.
I'm sure their are exceptions like Toronto and Edmonton may be having same amount of youth coming at same time.

While I agree with a lot of what you post I think you are a bit off base here. First off Murray & Jones are bona fide NHLers. We can debate whether or not they are true top pair guys but if they aren't they are pretty darn close.

Werenski most likely starts on the 3rd pair and Anderson on the 4th line. Ain't no lower spots to put them.

Maybe Bjorkstrand is a stretch as a top line guy but who is to say the Saad-Wennberg-Bjorkstrand line is #1.

I agree with those who say all of the rookies have earned spots barring a disastrous camp and that the rest of the young guns are all proven players who all should be better next season.

 

[LetsGOJackets!!]

Not claiming any revelations here but I side with those thinking our NHL rookies should produce. I'm looking for Bjork to pot some goals like Dano did for us.. I'm looking for Werenski to be the possession / offensive dman, for Anderson to play a Hartnell type game and be effective.

This is in no way delusions of grandeur like what I experienced years ago thinking a 2nd year prospect named Nash was going to carry the team. I watched him get beaten on quite a bit that first year. At least we are not jumping these rookies right from JR.. they have all played a period with the LEM, and experienced the Calder Cup win.

I may be full of ****, and eating crow by Thanksgiving, but this is the outlook I am going to take.

 

[Crede777]

I think the team is much more focused on getting better play from the veterans than from the rookies.

The only rookie(s) that may be heavily relied upon may be Korpisalo/Forsberg if Bobrovsky goes down again.

Otherwise, I think the focus is on the core that's already here (Jones, Murray, Jenner, Saad, Dubinsky, Foligno, Wennberg, Johnson, Savard, Atkinson).

 

[db2011]

From within the organization, which should have been done years ago. Honestly, this might be the first time this has happened in the history of the organization. I guess the novelty of the Calder Cup has worn off and I'm back to realizing this is a 27th place club that is relying on rookies for improvement. I just think Jarmo so far has misplayed his hand so to speak. Some time left, maybe something happens, but I think this is our club.

I'm not a fan of Jarmo, but someone made a point awhile ago that seems valid. The point was that the brick-by-brick approach has been happening the whole time, but it didn't really look that way because the Jackets managed to overachieve somewhat, and management seemed to react to that with certain big splashes (Gabby, Hartnell, Horton and Saad- Saad winds up fitting into the brick-by-brick ethos because he's young and now locked up. I think had Horton worked out, we'd be able to say that about him).

From this perspective, we've got some bricks ready this season. We'll see how it goes.

For the record, I'm not sure how much I buy this perspective (or if I've presented it well). But I don't think it's wrong to think the team was competitive sooner than management anticipated.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Difference is a lot of the "hope for the best rookies" are 3rd/4th line players on good teams, where if they produce it's gravy.
Our rookies (also throwing in young players) will be positioned as guys who need to produce for us not to suck. Based on line projections we'll have 3 d-men under 24 in our top 4 (again I argue Wereneski will start on 3rd pair) and a top 6 winger (Oliver).
Again on better teams you ease the young ones in and let me get their feet wet. We won't give them that luxury here. Maybe it's a good thing but it's a major difference when looking at a bunch of young players on other teams.
I'm sure their are exceptions like Toronto and Edmonton may be having same amount of youth coming at same time.

Wennberg, Jenner, Murray, Jones -- all have been eased in. Even if you don't consider their past lineup positions "eased," they're still at a place now where it's not their first rodeo.

And we have no idea where the rookies will shake out, lineup-wise.

Anyway, don't you want the team to suck properly? I know I know, they'll suck but not suck enough. We've been down this road before. Time for a new tune.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I'm not a fan of Jarmo, but someone made a point awhile ago that seems valid. The point was that the brick-by-brick approach has been happening the whole time, but it didn't really look that way because the Jackets managed to overachieve somewhat, and management seemed to react to that with certain big splashes (Gabby, Hartnell, Horton and Saad- Saad winds up fitting into the brick-by-brick ethos because he's young and now locked up. I think had Horton worked out, we'd be able to say that about him).

From this perspective, we've got some bricks ready this season. We'll see how it goes.

For the record, I'm not sure how much I buy this perspective (or if I've presented it well). But I don't think it's wrong to think the team was competitive sooner than management anticipated.

I'm not sure what all to make of the club's entire history of free agent signings, and I'm not interested in a history lesson. But I think this is where it's at now.

I've been saying, Dubi, JJ, Foligno, Bob, Cam. They are not the core. They are the bridge that gets us to Jones, Murray, Wennberg, Jenner, Saad and Forsbisalo, who are the core. And Milano, Bjorkstrand, Werenski are the next generation, the generation we thought the current 25-and-under was gonna be.

Whether or not it took us too long to get here, or if this one is doomed to fail, I don't care. At this point, anything is possible, and I don't see a whole lot of people changing their same old tune. I've read the same tired takes (not yours, db, but from some quarters) and they're gonna bring up the same history and cast the future in its light. I'm just gonna wait and see.

 

[db2011]

I'm not sure what all to make of the club's entire history of free agent signings, and I'm not interested in a history lesson. But I think this is where it's at now.

I've been saying, Dubi, JJ, Foligno, Bob, Cam. They are not the core. They are the bridge that gets us to Jones, Murray, Wennberg, Jenner, Saad and Forsbisalo, who are the core. And Milano, Bjorkstrand, Werenski are the next generation, the generation we thought the current 25-and-under was gonna be.

Whether or not it took us too long to get here, or if this one is doomed to fail, I don't care. At this point, anything is possible, and I don't see a whole lot of people changing their same old tune. I've read the same tired takes (not yours, db, but from some quarters) and they're gonna bring up the same history and cast the future in its light. I'm just gonna wait and see.

So you're putting the complete maturation of the FO's vision that far out there. I don't argue with you. Dubi and Nick, even though they got extended, and Cam, all those guys I guess you could see as "placeholders" or something.

I mean, they are the core in a lot of ways, but not the core of the team that will be built/iced as a direct product of JK and JD's vision.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

So you're putting the complete maturation of the FO's vision that far out there. I don't argue with you. Dubi and Nick, even though they got extended, and Cam, all those guys I guess you could see as "placeholders" or something.

I mean, they are the core in a lot of ways, but not the core of the team that will be built/iced as a direct product of JK and JD's vision.

I'm not really claiming to know, and maybe the plan changed. But I think that's the idea now. I'm also not suggesting that, if I'm right, it should get anyone more or less excited about the coming season (like it'd do any good).

 

[Xoggz22]

One thing I feel strongly about is that this team will be competitive if, if, they reduce the shots against and GAA. I'm not concerned about goals. I think they put up over 230 this year.

 

[LetsGOJackets!!]

I'm not really claiming to know, and maybe the plan changed. But I think that's the idea now. I'm also not suggesting that, if I'm right, it should get anyone more or less excited about the coming season (like it'd do any good).

I'm excited.. watched every minute of playoffs that I could. Loved it, would have loved it more if it was the boys in Union Blue!!

 

[db2011]

I'm not really claiming to know, and maybe the plan changed. But I think that's the idea now. I'm also not suggesting that, if I'm right, it should get anyone more or less excited about the coming season (like it'd do any good).

It seems plausible that's the plan now, and that would fit into a brick-by-brick long game (con?). I hope we have the personnel to support it. Seems like a lot falls on Wennberg's shoulders. Is there a comparable to Wenny as a 1C?

 

[Crede777]

I'm not a fan of Jarmo, but someone made a point awhile ago that seems valid. The point was that the brick-by-brick approach has been happening the whole time, but it didn't really look that way because the Jackets managed to overachieve somewhat, and management seemed to react to that with certain big splashes (Gabby, Hartnell, Horton and Saad- Saad winds up fitting into the brick-by-brick ethos because he's young and now locked up. I think had Horton worked out, we'd be able to say that about him).

From this perspective, we've got some bricks ready this season. We'll see how it goes.

For the record, I'm not sure how much I buy this perspective (or if I've presented it well). But I don't think it's wrong to think the team was competitive sooner than management anticipated.

Prefacing this post, I want to say it's entirely possible these past 2 seasons of not making the playoffs were flukes. Obviously the injury and man games lost was well above the norm. And key players performed well below their averages. I have a theory that this past season was a recovery or an aftershock given the huge amount of injuries we had the season before. That in spite of the winning streak our season ended on the prior season, guys mostly spent the offseason recovering and were rusty when the season started up again which lead to the 0-8 start.

-Now comes the negative-

From the devil's advocate perspective - isn't the ability to distinguish flash in the pan seasons (both from a team and individual player perspective) from longterm success/trends part of the reason why Davidson and Jarmo hold the positions they do?

Obviously the lay person can say "we made the playoffs, we are a playoff caliber team." But shouldn't people with elite knowledge of team building be able to say "yes we made the playoffs but this still isn't a playoff caliber team?" Maybe not out loud, but internally shouldn't they be able to recognize a fluke?

I think there's a question about if management was fooled by this team and they were fooled by Foligno's 70 point season. If so, then shouldn't they (of all people) not have been fooled?

Naturally, I've discounted the Foligno situation. I believe Jarmo had very few options. Of course he had to re-sign Foligno (30 goal season, captain of All-Star team in Columbus). And Foligno had a lot of leverage given that season's production.

But a lot of the moves management has made seem, right now, premature. Would I have made them, believing this was a playoff caliber team? Maybe, but then again I'm not the General Manager of a professional hockey team.

 

[Old Guy]

I just realized, we haven't signed anyone from another organization this summer. Not even a single minor leaguer. This is one boring offseason, even as boring offseasons go.

Understand. But in my perfect world, you would never have the reason to sign a long-term UFA. Depth pieces should be picked up at the trade deadline and their contracts expire on June 30. I'm actually excited the CBJ are sitting it out.

Now before everybody shouts at me that we had no cap room to sign anybody anyway, I get that. Too many players under performed and made it look like this team is in cap hell. They are.

But I prefer to take a longer view. I think Jarmo is working his way through those contracts and creating space for fast, talented, smart players to fill the roster.

The Horton deal has blown up in his face and his signings of Foligino, Bobrovsky and (lesser extent) Dubinsky don't look good after last year's performance. But his Wiz trade looks good. His Saad trade looks good. His Umberger trade looks good. Hartnell has done way more over the last two years than Umberger did. Is anybody arguing with his draft and develop thus far? I'm not, I think it is going very well.

Those are just opinions.......mine. You can disagree, but I see bricks being in place. I wish it was faster, but I'm optimistic.

 

[Crede777]

Those are just opinions.......mine. You can disagree, but I see bricks being in place. I wish it was faster, but I'm optimistic.

I just wish they'd stop taking bricks out to replace with other bricks. And I wish the bricks we had would stop crumbling.

 

[CBJx614]

I just wish they'd stop taking bricks out to replace with other bricks. And I wish the bricks we had would stop crumbling.

They took out Horton and replaced it with a crumbling brick

They took out Gaborik and replaced it with a cornerstone piece.

They took out a crumbling brick in Umberger and replaced it with a solid brick in Hartnell

They took out a crumbled brick in Wiz and turned it into a solid brick in Karlsson


Really IMO it comes down to how you weigh the Horton and Johansen situations

Horton was a ****ed up situation no if ands or buts. No excuses there.

But they made the best out of the Johansen situation and i'd argue we're in a better place now than we were.

Gaborik was a failed experiment, but if that trade never happens(both ways) are we able to bring in a player like Saad?


Everytime I look at it, I see more positives than negatives so far. The negatives are just bigger than the postives, to this point. But I think Jones can honestly make us forget about Johansen.

 

[Crede777]

They took out Horton and replaced it with a crumbling brick

They took out Gaborik and replaced it with a cornerstone piece.

They took out a crumbling brick in Umberger and replaced it with a solid brick in Hartnell

They took out a crumbled brick in Wiz and turned it into a solid brick in Karlsson


Really IMO it comes down to how you weigh the Horton and Johansen situations

Horton was a ****ed up situation no if ands or buts. No excuses there.

But they made the best out of the Johansen situation and i'd argue we're in a better place now than we were.

Gaborik was a failed experiment, but if that trade never happens(both ways) are we able to bring in a player like Saad?


Everytime I look at it, I see more positives than negatives so far. The negatives are just bigger than the postives, to this point. But I think Jones can honestly make us forget about Johansen.

You're excluding the part where they put in Horton, put in Gaborik, and removed Mackenzie and Letestu and eventually put in Campbell.

I'm saying I wish that they'd have been right the first go around (Horton, Gaborik, Campbell, etc.) rather than looking for a mulligan.

Instead, they came in and said "we're building brick by brick." Then the team narrowly missed and then made the playoffs. And they said "oh wow the wall is already way more built than we'd expected" and jumped ahead a few steps. As I posted above, shouldn't they be the ones (of all people) to recognize when success was merely an illusion? Shouldn't they have said "I know we're experiencing success, but we're still building" and taken it more slowly/cautiously?

Hindsight is 20/20, but when you're in a position like JD and Jarmo with the credentials they have, I think the expectation should be that foresight is 19.5/20.

It's like if I were to complain of my stomach hurting to a friend and he just says "it's probably a stomach ache from something you ate." Sure, what does he know? He's just some guy. But if I go to a gastroenterologist and present my symptoms, I expect he'll be able to diagnose me much more accurately than my friend. He knows things that 99.9% of people don't. That's why he occupies an exclusive position and gets paid lots of money. Will he be right every time? No but he's right the vast majority of the time and there are consequences for when he's wrong.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

Woke up really excited today.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

You're excluding the part where they put in Horton, put in Gaborik, and removed Mackenzie and Letestu and eventually put in Campbell.

I'm saying I wish that they'd have been right the first go around (Horton, Gaborik, Campbell, etc.) rather than looking for a mulligan.

Instead, they came in and said "we're building brick by brick." Then the team narrowly missed and then made the playoffs. And they said "oh wow the wall is already way more built than we'd expected" and jumped ahead a few steps. As I posted above, shouldn't they be the ones (of all people) to recognize when success was merely an illusion? Shouldn't they have said "I know we're experiencing success, but we're still building" and taken it more slowly/cautiously?

Hindsight is 20/20, but when you're in a position like JD and Jarmo with the credentials they have, I think the expectation should be that foresight is 19.5/20.

I don't think your beefs with the Horton, Gaborik, Mackenzie and Letestu situations are consistent, save for the fact that they all appear to have been bad/you weren't in favor of them.

Yes, there have been missteps, and I was among the earliest to voice concerns over a perceived lack of cohesive strategy (despite the tired "brick by brick" statement). But I'm not convinced your read about "jumping ahead" is necessarily accurate, and I don't think you can view all of those moves through the same lens.

 

[Crede777]

I don't think your beefs with the Horton, Gaborik, Mackenzie and Letestu situations are consistent, save for the fact that they all appear to have been bad/you weren't in favor of them.

Yes, there have been missteps, and I was among the earliest to voice concerns over a perceived lack of cohesive strategy (despite the tired "brick by brick" statement). But I'm not convinced your read about "jumping ahead" is necessarily accurate, and I don't think you can view all of those moves through the same lens.

The lens I'm viewing them through is when JD proclaimed that this team was a lot further along than he thought when he first arrived.

Turns out it wasn't. And he failed to recognize that. Recognizing consistent talent and maintaining a cohesive plan are two of the main reasons he was brought in. Again, he was brought in precisely to be the one to say "that 70 point season from Foligno? Yeah that's a fluke I've seen it before." Maybe not aloud, but internally.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

The lens I'm viewing them through is when JD proclaimed that this team was a lot further along than he thought when he first arrived.

Turns out it wasn't. And he failed to recognize that. Recognizing consistent talent and maintaining a cohesive plan are two of the main reasons he was brought in. Again, he was brought in precisely to be the one to say "that 70 point season from Foligno? Yeah that's a fluke I've seen it before." Maybe not aloud, but internally.

But I'm not sure what JD's belief the team was further along has to do with the Mackenzie and Letestu situations.

 

[Crede777]

But I'm not sure what JD's belief the team was further along has to do with the Mackenzie and Letestu situations.

Because the team was further along, they sought to replace the older 4th liners with young guys who they severely misjudged (Chaput, D'Amigo). They then went after Campbell due to his postseason success with the Bruins (similar to why they targeted Horton).

They lost time and money by being unable to say "yep, these guys are productive and will continue to be productive for the next few years, we need to keep them."