Porty's comments are essentially what I was talking about here.
since the beginning that acquiring Laine marked the end of the high accountability team-focused club that we had.
Worth the listen
Porty got the year wrong, but around 4:45 in the video it gets interesting
He got a lot of details wrong. Jenner was there, not Foligno, and yes it was Spring 2021 when they had the meeting.
Okay, now look at the facts:
Jones wanted to play in a big market. Anyway, we can be glad he left, seeing his play in Chicago.
Everyone saw the reason for the Atkinson trade, we needed a playmaker and Cam wasn't that player for a long time, besides he had a long contract, btw look at his play in Philly. He seems to have a good relationship with Laine as well.
Gus wasn't traded until two years after the events and he played great on the line with .. Laine in the 2021/22 season.
Werenski told Finnish reporters that Patrik is a top NHL player when healthy and hopes to return for this year's World Championships in the Czech Republic. Although he didn't have to say that. And he seems to have a good relationship with him as well.
For Foligno, in addition to Nick's expiring contract, he was actually just loaned to Toronto. We're past the first round.
And if there was a problem with Laine in future seasons, one of the reporters would surely find out.
Some player would have told him. And if he was worried during the Jarmo time, he wouldn't have had a problem after he left.
Werenski, Nyquist, and Jenner were all in the meeting and all stayed. Jones made it clear after that meeting that he wanted to leave, but it may have been partly related to him not liking the club abandoning it's locker room in favor of Laine / and or Elvis.
The Atkinson trade worked as a hockey trade but the immediate impetus reported at the time was to get him away from Laine.
You also have Brad Shaw leaving shortly after, which could easily have been covered as him wanting to stick with Torts, but Shaw specifically said he didn't agree with the club's decisions.
jones + atkinson were basically saying "get rid of the star you just traded for and build around us" – but atkinson's game cratered without panarin, and jones wasn't willing to even talk about a long-term deal with the jackets.
there is no way that those guys got moved because they told jarmo to get rid of laine, as portzline surmises. they got moved because 1) cam was clearly not the same player anymore and 2) the roster still wouldn't be good had jones stayed, but would've been a disaster had they lost him for nothing.
they had to do a tear-down. laine stayed for the same reason werenski did – because they were impact players in their early-20s who could've become building blocks. one did, one didn't.
laine was apparently never a fit in the room, and the laine experiment didn't work out, but portzline's framing of this is journalistic malpractice.
That's actually your editorializing. You don't like Portzline's narrative so you're inserting your own, which is further from the truth.
It was obvious at the time that the leadership wanted to keep the accountability systems they had had in place for years. That's why they didn't want Laine or Merzlikins, because they refused to be held accountable. They weren't saying "build around us we're better players", it was about the room the entire time.
The timing of the Atkinson move was right after the meeting and it was reported at the time that it was because of Laine's presence. This isn't a new report.
Yes the team needed massive changes regardless, but that can be true in addition to the fact that the leadership group didn't want Laine and Elvis. Having a good hockey trade for Atkinson doesn't refute the report either.