We Want Ten
Johnny Gaudreau
I'm starting to feel this way too. The idea of building around a single Prima Donna leaves me uncomfortable.
Ryan Johansen Watch IV
- Thread starter Samkow
- Start date
- Status
I'm starting to feel this way too. The idea of building around a single Prima Donna leaves me uncomfortable.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
He is worth more than 3.5 on a free and open market. Unfortunately for him he is not in that kind of market. Jackets are taking advantage of, and being careful not to break any barriers in, the RFA market. To me this sums up the whole debate.
TaketheCannoli
RIP
I'm not so sure he has attitude issues. I do believe this team has the center depth to succeed without him. I'm not sure it has the depth however to succeed without Boone and Horton plus Johansen. What the CBJ needs is scoring depth on the wings.
What his board needs is more of The Godfather references. I think one side or the other should make a horsehead offer.
There is literally 0 credible evidence that Ryan Johansen is a "prima donna" but go ahead and keep pushing that narrative.
****except ZOMG THE SPRINGFIELD INCIDENT*****
Last edited by a moderator:
What evidence do you have that he's never had a disciplinary situation? You keep harping on him being perfect yet we all know he got benched in Springy. That's a fact. So where's your factual evidence that he's perfect?
I like Joey a lot. And I tend to think most of this hubbub is being pushed by KO. But for all that you ask us for evidence you never provide any yourself.
Ar-too
Zealous Scrub
Zero credible evidence except for the Springfield incident and the fact that he hasn't signed reasonable contract offers to this point. Other than that, ya know... zero credible evidence.
It's like saying there's zero credible evidence that the sky is blue.
It's like saying there's zero credible evidence that the sky is blue.
Didn't we discuss his potential attitudes issues like 500 times already?
Came in to see if there was an update; nope!
Came in to see if there was an update; nope!
Whoa whoa whoa! You were responding to a post of mine. And nowhere did I say "the team could win without Ryan Johansen" nor did I say the team "doesn't need" any key players. I said the team (currently) isn't built to have any key players.
That is about the most intellectually dishonest thing you've written in this thread.
CentreKeeper12
TheCentreKeeper
Remember the 2 year deal was considered a low ball offer, and the 6 and 8 year deals were offered only a week before JD had his "tirade" and those don't count according to some. It's all about the positives he brings, he may throw a hissy fit and not try for big stretches, but he is a #1 center, gotta pay him because of that.
the posts on this thread are both highly entertaining and deeply disturbing as logic is thrown out the window. So how do I block myself from viewing this thread?
the regular season can't come soon enough
the regular season can't come soon enough
When did he throw a "hissy fit" last year or haven't a long stretch when he "didnt try?"
Having a contract dispute doesnt make johansen a prima Donna any more than it made Brandon dubinsky one. Or Jamie benn one. Or Pk Subban one. Etc etc.
If he was as bad as you say he is you wouldn't have to go back to 2013 to find an example and you'd be able to come up with more than one.
Ar-too
Zealous Scrub
Typical of your behavior in this thread. You say there's no evidence because you reject the evidence that exists and appoint yourself the authority which determines whether evidence presented is valid.
Typical of your behavior in this thread. You say there's no evidence because you reject the evidence that exists and appoint yourself the authority which determines whether evidence presented is valid.
I never said he didn't get benched one time in the AHL playoffs . It happened. It takes more than that to give someone "prima donna status" especially considering how great he was last year w no issues. A business dispute is not a character issue.
Sore Loser
Sorest of them all
I can't wait until Johansen signs at a reasonable, $3.5-$4.0 million per year, completely proving IHZ wrong for the entire duration of his argument against signing him so low.
Hint: It's going to happen in the next three days. Then the argument will become "I told you so" for one side or the other. That's when the real annoying discussions will start.
Hint: It's going to happen in the next three days. Then the argument will become "I told you so" for one side or the other. That's when the real annoying discussions will start.
candyman82
Registered User
Typical of your behavior in this thread. You say there's no evidence because you reject the evidence that exists and appoint yourself the authority which determines whether evidence presented is valid.
Surprisingly, I'm with Zherdev on this one. Players of all kinds have contract disputes. That does not make them "prima donna". Additionally, I think taking one incident in Springfield and extrapolating from it that Johansen is a prima donna is kind of ridiculous. We don't know his character.
Sorry, but none of your evidence is very convincing.
cbjgirl
Just thinking
With the current configuration, I think we have more skill on the wings than last season. We switched Umberger and Hartnell. That probably ends up being about a wash offensively. Then dropped MacKenzie for Chaput - that one is probably also a wash. Wennberg, Rychel, and Dano (I think) are more skilled than Comeau and Skille. Last year's Horton wasn't the Horton we fans thought he could be due to injuries. Gaborik didn't play a whole lot.
My opinion, the CBJ will be fine whether Johansen suits up or not. Bob and McElhinney have looked good this preseason, the defense is more or less intact from last year, the guys from the AHL were all schooled in CBJ hockey. Everyone is on the same page. Do they have a true "#1 line"? No, but they didn't have one last year either.
How would that prove me wrong? I've never said he would get a certain amount. I do however under stand him his and his agents position
Nanabijou
Booooooooooone
Doug - what's your new username going to be then?
From Doug61 to Doug19 to Doug72? On second thought, stop jinxing our players!
- Status
