From what I have found it counts against cap but if you can move it to LTIR then you get relief. Don't know if that is a real option or how you make it work when the guy comes back.How does the player assistance program affect salary cap? Seems like Laine’s decision could have big implications for trades/free agency.
I agree. I kind of had a mid-post thought correction so ideally I'd like Tarasov & Brosssoit in the NHL and Greaves developoing in Cleveland and available for recall when needed with another goalie to back him up down there.You are going to need 1-2 more goalies for depth anyway. if Jet is the backup in Columus next season we'll need guys on NHL contracts to play in Cleveland. I'm sure one of those could be a vet with NHL experience but it would also be nice to have another guy on the roster as a prospect. Pavel Cajan was on an AHL only deal so I don't think it's him. Maybe they bring back Subban for next year as part of that process.
im not the only one LOL. just the word around the leagueArent you the same guy basically calling Jiricek a bust?
jiricek has some things he still needs to work on, but he now gets to join cleveland for playoff run and then will have a full offseason of training (should help with his strength + skating). his offensive traits are NHL level (some of his tools there are NHL-plus) and his stick defending didn't bother me this year. he's just a bit slow on his reads/pivots and needs to get better in battles.im not the only one LOL. just the word around the league
words from a former first round bust.
do you not see the irony in your words or is that just me?im not the only one LOL. just the word around the league
words from a former first round bust.
People are busy tearing apart coaches instead of cheering for teams.everything's a critique now. what happened to actually cheering for the players on the team?
You left out IMO….Severson played like a 4/5 D for a month or two when he just started here, after that he was good. I don't like the contract but I have no problem with him as a player.
Sillinger is an iffy 3C, we have a surfeit of players that age who have higher upside than him.
If I’m him, I’d want more of an opportunity.I didn't realize that Blanks qualified for that.
It makes sense though, this is why group VI exists, to make sure that mid-twenties players don't get buried in a deep lineup and have a chance to break in somewhere else.
No one in this thread has listed Blanks in their lineups for next year.
I would still sign him if he wants to come back, but it's his call.
He'd get his opportunities if he could stay healthy.If I’m him, I’d want more of an opportunity.
Love to have him around though.
the better teams usually don't have many players under 24. The Bruins have none. The Lightning have some guy named Lilleberg, the Panthers only Lundell, the Canucks only Hoglander, or maybe you can add Podkolzin if he sticks. The Oilers have Broberg and Holloway which have yet to establish themselves.
Leaving aside team success, and just looking at individual production - have a look at the top 20 scorers in the league, Robert Thomas and Quinn Hughes are 24, everyone else is 25 or older. No one 23 or under.
So yes rookie goal scoring isn't what it used to be, and young player scoring in general isn't what it used to be.
Depending on what player comes back, I could see Columbus moving out the following sub-25 skaters, from most likely to least likely:This is from a comment of mine on the mains, that I think is worth thinking about with our very young team.
We framed it the other day as needing to leave spots for good pro scouting finds, so we can improve with ready to go mid-twenties players. What that means is that we need fewer young players. But if we did cut back on roster spots for under 24 players, who would we be moving out?
Depending on what player comes back, I could see Columbus moving out the following sub-25 skaters, from most likely to least likely:
1. Bean
2. Boqvist
3. Texier
4. Chinakhov
5. Marchenko
6. Sillinger/Voronkov
8. Johnson/Mateychuk
Jiricek and Fantilli are probably still untouchable. Johnson and Mateychuk are pretty damn close to it. Jiricek I'd only move out for a Wyatt Johnston or a Robert Thomas and if the Blue Jackets drafted someone like Levshunov. Fantilli is here to stay.
For instance, though I love them both as players, I'd be intrigued to see what a package centred around Texier + Marchenko could return. Texier is a player that I don't think will be around long-term.
The problem is that the Bostons/Tampas/Canucks/Oilers of the world have elite players aged 24-30. Where are ours? We just drafted them. We need to let the young guys develop.But if we did cut back on roster spots for under 24 players, who would we be moving out?
I didn't realize that Blanks qualified for that.
It makes sense though, this is why group VI exists, to make sure that mid-twenties players don't get buried in a deep lineup and have a chance to break in somewhere else.
No one in this thread has listed Blanks in their lineups for next year.
I would still sign him if he wants to come back, but it's his call.
The problem is that the Bostons/Tampas/Canucks/Oilers of the world have elite players aged 24-30. Where are ours? We just drafted them. We need to let the young guys develop.
Dallas has had plenty of young guys on their roster for many years.
Kent Johnson remains untouchable. A 40 point season at age 20! For CBJ rookies that point total only falls behind Werenski and Dubois all time. We asked him to put on weight (he did) and it changed the way he played. He just needs to adjust. 23/24 KJ in his “down year” still paced for 31 points. Cole Sillinger in a “good season” finishes with 32 points. Voronkov is a “stud” and finishes the year with 34 points.
Jenner was 22 when he got above 40 points, Bjorkstrand 22, Foligno 23. KJ ain’t going anywhere.
I agree that we shouldn't move out any of o
And who would want them? SJ? Chi? Ducks? I think we have a bunch of guys with good upside but once the new GM shows up some may have to go to bring in necessary upgrades.ur guys with elite upside, it's those that don't have that upside that we should be looking at.