Player Discussion: Kirill Marchenko thread
- Thread starter spintheblackcircle
- Start date
I had to laugh at twitter and facebook already calling for Waddell to be removed because he's going to run off all of our young players by only giving them bridge deals when we need to start locking down our kids like Marchenko with a 5x5
Highly unlikely imo. People who have doubts about his offensive upside should watch the video that was already posted here. It isn't just a goal montage, it also contains a lot of assist plays and almost goals where he shows off his playmaking and 1v1 skills.
I'd much rather have him on a long-term deal than Monahan or Sillinger.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,847
- 4,454
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,921
- 7,088
Most of the moves through the defense are more of an indictment of defencemen playing the puck and not the body (I watched the first few minutes). By the time he's through with most of the moves that I saw, he's too close to the goalie to do much.
He's a decent player. He skates well and is pretty shifty with the puck at times. Potential 30 goals scorer. He doesn't impress me as a good playmaker-average to slightly below average- would be my assessment. His physical play is lacking.
In any case, he's got 3 years to go until he's a UFA. He's not going to be a PPG guy more than likely. I don't see the CBJ getting a potential discount on his contract that's worth the risk of going long term.
I put him and Voronkov and Chinakov in the same boat. RFA them all. If they all turn out to be 100 points players then that's what I guess you call a high class problem.
Discretion is the better part of valor this off season regarding the CBJ going L/T contract for anyone else who hasn't been signed to one at this point.
Last edited:
koteka
Registered User
I pretty much agree with this. I think Marchenko is a guy you like having on entry level and RFA contracts, but I don’t know that you want to be buying too many UFA years at a much higher amount. And I really like the guy and think he is the glue holding a lot of the European guys together, but he is just an ok middle 6 wing. Spend your money on centers, right D, and maybe 1 high end wing. Don’t throw your money at left D, wings, and an unproven goalie. If Marchenko scores 40 goals next year, I’ll be happy to be wrong about his ceiling.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
I don’t really disagree with most of the takes here on Marchenko the player or on the kind of contract the club should be offering him. I’m just adding some food for thought to the discussion.
A productive veteran middle six winger in his late-ish 20s who also has some glue to him is just the kind of player many of us thought would be the ideal add this summer. It’s also the kind of player Marchenko profiles as in a couple years. Yeah the team makeup will be different but I don’t think you can understate the value of those players.
A productive veteran middle six winger in his late-ish 20s who also has some glue to him is just the kind of player many of us thought would be the ideal add this summer. It’s also the kind of player Marchenko profiles as in a couple years. Yeah the team makeup will be different but I don’t think you can understate the value of those players.
Xoggz22
Registered User
I'm agnostic to the type of contract. I'm a big Marchenko fan as I think he's also a great bridge for the Russian players in the room. I do believe he's a 30 goal scorer with an improved team and I don't know how many teams have 30 goal scorers in their 20's that they wouldn't want to keep long term. That said, whether it's long term or short team, provided the contract is moveable down the road (should that be the direction the team needs/wants to take), then there isn't much else to talk about. We don't have a replacement now or the next couple years (internally) so let's just enjoy him for however long he's here. Good fit, good guy, good future... (yeah, play on Chinny's post game 
)
)
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,840
- 26,930
I think a 5x5 for him is perfect, there's risk on both sides.
Maybe he becomes worth more than that and he's selling himself short but he'll set himself up to get paid on his next deal.
We take the risk of overpaying him if he doesn't live up to expectations.
Maybe he becomes worth more than that and he's selling himself short but he'll set himself up to get paid on his next deal.
We take the risk of overpaying him if he doesn't live up to expectations.
Doggy
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2011
- 3,755
- 2,878
What risk? He is already almost a 25-25-50 guy with just two years of NHL experience. I would think 5x5 for a 24 year old with that offensive production is the going rate.
No offensive move made by our guys is a good play, its just bad defense. Taking whats given doesnt exist
koteka
Registered User
Anytime you sign a long term deal, there's a risk.. especially for a young kid with a new coach, system and upper management in place. He could get paid and suddenly be content as he's "made it" and got his guaranteed money. It wouldn't be the first time it's happened and it certainly wouldn't be the last
Having said that, I don't think that's the case in slightest, but to say there's no risk would be foolish. Nothing is guaranteed but the contracts in the NHL.
This just furthers my case. There's risk on both sides.
Marchenko risks missing out a huge payday in 2-3 if he continues to progress.
CBJ risks Marchenko stalling in his progression and never becoming more than a 40 pt player.
There's risk with any long term deal, yes. But I think that risk is relatively low for Marchenko, compared to your average young winger. He's got a great skillset and I like his defense and all around base. A 5 x 5 would be fine.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,847
- 4,454
If he winds up with a two year deal he'll be 26 when he'll be eligible for an 8 yr deal locking him up for his career. Jackets can open the checkbook then if he becomes a 60+ pt per season guy by then.
As an alternative as I mentioned previously a 5x5 would compare to Byfield's new deal. I hope the 2 yr is where it ends up .To me term is more important to the.CBJ than $
As an alternative as I mentioned previously a 5x5 would compare to Byfield's new deal. I hope the 2 yr is where it ends up .To me term is more important to the.CBJ than $
The bigger risk from Jackets perspective might be that by the time they're ready to compete there won't be a single core player on a long team friendly contract to avoid cap issues.
I don't think they can because the argument against locking him up then will be "he would be too expensive for just an okay 60pt winger so let's trade him for a real hockey player like tall center or right-handed defenseman".
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,847
- 4,454
We're talking 2 years from now. Laine will be gone along with his cap hit. Elvis more than likely. Chinny will be re-signed or gone by then. Your cap problems are way overblown imo.
I don't think they can because the argument against locking him up then will be "he would be too expensive for just an okay 60pt winger so let's trade him for a real hockey player like tall center or right-handed defenseman".Fixed it for you.
koteka
Registered User
Or let’s trade him for a couple of young wings. Right now we would love to trade a couple of young wing and/or wing prospects for a solid veteran.
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,840
- 26,930
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
I enjoy Marchy. I believe he is my new/current favorite Jacket. He might have been last year too but for sure moving forward.
Chinakhov’s better!!!
In all seriousness, love Marchenko as a player. Needs to add some patience to his game, slow it down a bit more at times with the puck, and improve his shot selection.
Skating AGILITY could use some improvement. I think he also needs to add some more muscle to his frame to add to his effectiveness, even if his top speed lowers a bit.
All in all, I’m all for keeping all 3 of the Russians for as long as possible.
