Jets vs Blues

[HardCoreBlue]

 

Buff is a guy to trade... His play will decline sharply sooner then later.

You don't see improvement? Don't you think this club would smoke the Antropov jets? I think the tougher division really skews just how much the team has improved.

Yes for sure.  I do see improvement.  Ive always looked at the Jets through rose-coloured glasses.  But this win one lose one has to stop.  Regardless of the division.  This is the division they play in.  They wanted to be in the West from day one.  That is the team they should have built.  I think they play better defensively. I think they are a better puck posession team.

 

But all that simply equals another season with the same record.  Its not that they havent improved, its that they are still within the same general level of success.  And thats not good enough.

 

Yes Dustin Byfuglien is good for on average one or so mistakes a game but he brings such a dominance to the game that is hard to replace. Not too many players in the NHL can do what he does, e.g. defense, forward, PP, PK. He'd probably play Goalie if he had to and do it well. He helps give us an identity that other teams would kill for, e.g., the Oilers.

 

If it was up to me, no way do we trade him. If anything, we build around him to help him even play more to his strengths. 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

Buff is a guy to trade... His play will decline sharply sooner then later.

You don't see improvement? Don't you think this club would smoke the Antropov jets? I think the tougher division really skews just how much the team has improved.

Yes for sure.  I do see improvement.  Ive always looked at the Jets through rose-coloured glasses.  But this win one lose one has to stop.  Regardless of the division.  This is the division they play in.  They wanted to be in the West from day one.  That is the team they should have built.  I think they play better defensively. I think they are a better puck posession team.

 

But all that simply equals another season with the same record.  Its not that they havent improved, its that they are still within the same general level of success.  And thats not good enough.

 

Yes Dustin Byfuglien is good for on average one or so mistakes a game but he brings such a dominance to the game that is hard to replace. Not too many players in the NHL can do what he does, e.g. defense, forward, PP, PK. He'd probably play Goalie if he had to and do it well. He helps give us an identity that other teams would kill for, e.g., the Oilers.

 

If it was up to me, no way do we trade him. If anything, we build around him to help him even play more to his strengths. 

 

I used to think this way.  But to what end?  He's 30 years old with one year left on his contract.

[Rich]

IF the right deal were to present itself, I would definitely trade him.  It has been mentioned previously, but for a man of that size, when the drop off happens it is going to happen quickly.  Knees and joints take that much more of a beating with the weight and size he carries.

 

He is currently 29, next year is the last year of his contract and he will be 30.  Purely a guess, but I would say his drop-off starts happening around 32 – 33.  Trade him now while the team is “on the edge” sort a speak, and a shakeup is warranted.  Be nice to get a few pieces to help the forward depth and prospects to join the up and comers.  Would need at least one top 6 forward (or a younger player who could be ready to be a top 6 this year or next) and a decent prospect.  Maybe throw in a bottom 6 to bolster our depth there and send back a later draft pick.

 

My biggest fear is he is going into the last year of his contract next year, and next year we are on the bubble of making the playoffs (again) at the draft deadline and Chevy doesn’t deal him because we “may” make the playoffs, then we lose him for nothing in free agency.   Someone is likely to offer him a longer term then I’d be comfortable with when he hits free agency in a couple of years.

 

Now of course it is possible no one is offering the pieces Chevy would want in return, but I would have to think there is a contender who would be interested in his services.   The one issue I do see is some of the contenders may not be able to take his cap hit of 5.2M.  While not an excessive salary in this day and age, with the rumors of the cap not going up a whole lot next year, teams that would normally be interested may not have the cap space to deal for him.  If this is the case, we wouldn’t be able to deal him until the trade deadline next season.

[Mr Dee]

The Jets are not alone in being in the middle range of hockey teams.

They will fight to stay close to being a playoff team, in a tough division…in a tough conference.

Complaining about the Jets not doing anything will only upset those who are maybe expecting too much from this team.

 

We're going to have to be satisfied with the upside of this team and enjoy the new young players coming along.

 

A simple trade here and there might, and I say might, get a team closer to the playoffs, if the right deal can be worked out

But all teams want the right deal, don't they?

 

The Jets are not going join the elite strata this year, but piece by piece, they can get closer.

Face it. It will take time.

[HardCoreBlue]

IF the right deal were to present itself, I would definitely trade him.  It has been mentioned previously, but for a man of that size, when the drop off happens it is going to happen quickly.  Knees and joints take that much more of a beating with the weight and size he carries.

 

He is currently 29, next year is the last year of his contract and he will be 30.  Purely a guess, but I would say his drop-off starts happening around 32 – 33.  Trade him now while the team is “on the edge” sort a speak, and a shakeup is warranted.  Be nice to get a few pieces to help the forward depth and prospects to join the up and comers.  Would need at least one top 6 forward (or a younger player who could be ready to be a top 6 this year or next) and a decent prospect.  Maybe throw in a bottom 6 to bolster our depth there and send back a later draft pick.

 

My biggest fear is he is going into the last year of his contract next year, and next year we are on the bubble of making the playoffs (again) at the draft deadline and Chevy doesn’t deal him because we “may” make the playoffs, then we lose him for nothing in free agency.   Someone is likely to offer him a longer term then I’d be comfortable with when he hits free agency in a couple of years.

 

Now of course it is possible no one is offering the pieces Chevy would want in return, but I would have to think there is a contender who would be interested in his services.   The one issue I do see is some of the contenders may not be able to take his cap hit of 5.2M.  While not an excessive salary in this day and age, with the rumors of the cap not going up a whole lot next year, teams that would normally be interested may not have the cap space to deal for him.  If this is the case, we wouldn’t be able to deal him until the trade deadline next season.

Maybe, maybe not. Regardless, imho, we trade Buff, we 'take from Peter, give to Paul' as the saying goes. Not to mention the fact (which you made somewhat) that most other teams are usually smart and will feel hard pressed to give up anything substantial WE NEED.   

 

Being 29/30 in this league is not really the same as it was 10/15 years ago. If he is taking care of himself (which is probably a whole other discussion), another 5-7 years of productivity is not out of the question. I say re-sign, he's too much of a special player not too. I think he likes it here, just a feeling. Doesn't seem to like the limelight all that much which he can usually get here compared to other cities. 

[The Unknown Poster]

IF the right deal were to present itself, I would definitely trade him.  It has been mentioned previously, but for a man of that size, when the drop off happens it is going to happen quickly.  Knees and joints take that much more of a beating with the weight and size he carries.

 

He is currently 29, next year is the last year of his contract and he will be 30.  Purely a guess, but I would say his drop-off starts happening around 32 – 33.  Trade him now while the team is “on the edge” sort a speak, and a shakeup is warranted.  Be nice to get a few pieces to help the forward depth and prospects to join the up and comers.  Would need at least one top 6 forward (or a younger player who could be ready to be a top 6 this year or next) and a decent prospect.  Maybe throw in a bottom 6 to bolster our depth there and send back a later draft pick.

 

My biggest fear is he is going into the last year of his contract next year, and next year we are on the bubble of making the playoffs (again) at the draft deadline and Chevy doesn’t deal him because we “may” make the playoffs, then we lose him for nothing in free agency.   Someone is likely to offer him a longer term then I’d be comfortable with when he hits free agency in a couple of years.

 

Now of course it is possible no one is offering the pieces Chevy would want in return, but I would have to think there is a contender who would be interested in his services.   The one issue I do see is some of the contenders may not be able to take his cap hit of 5.2M.  While not an excessive salary in this day and age, with the rumors of the cap not going up a whole lot next year, teams that would normally be interested may not have the cap space to deal for him.  If this is the case, we wouldn’t be able to deal him until the trade deadline next season.

Great post.  its even worse.  He's 30 in March so his final contract year he turns 31.  Right at that cusp you mentioned of his play potentially declining.  His cap hit is good for the impact he brings.  He's a top six forward and/or a top pairing D-man, special teams, and many teams will consider him the difference maker in the playoffs.  In real dollars, he's $6 million next season.  Are the Jets really going to sign him to a long term contract at that point?  And if not (hopefully not), why pay him $6m next season and end up exactly as you said, on the bubble in February and Chevy keeps him and we just miss the playoffs.\

 

I'd be trading him this year.  The good news is Chevy has a repuation for not making deals.  So other teams know he isnt easy.  Team *will* pay big for a player who's worth it so there will be plenty of interest.  The problem I see is actually a contending team that wants Buff for the playoffs will not want to give up the quality of player we'd need in return.  A deal like that happens in the off-season.  But if you look at a team like Boston that has long been rumoured to be interested in Buff, they have lots of depth and potentially a willingness to shake things up.  They have the cap space too.

 

Pens are another team.  I dont know if Buff is what they envision and they only have $3million in space but Buff's would be pro-rated plus they'd free up space with whomever they'd send back.  Would sweetening the pot with a potential top six winger like Burmi make them interested?  Get Sutter+ back.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

IF the right deal were to present itself, I would definitely trade him.  It has been mentioned previously, but for a man of that size, when the drop off happens it is going to happen quickly.  Knees and joints take that much more of a beating with the weight and size he carries.

 

He is currently 29, next year is the last year of his contract and he will be 30.  Purely a guess, but I would say his drop-off starts happening around 32 – 33.  Trade him now while the team is “on the edge” sort a speak, and a shakeup is warranted.  Be nice to get a few pieces to help the forward depth and prospects to join the up and comers.  Would need at least one top 6 forward (or a younger player who could be ready to be a top 6 this year or next) and a decent prospect.  Maybe throw in a bottom 6 to bolster our depth there and send back a later draft pick.

 

My biggest fear is he is going into the last year of his contract next year, and next year we are on the bubble of making the playoffs (again) at the draft deadline and Chevy doesn’t deal him because we “may” make the playoffs, then we lose him for nothing in free agency.   Someone is likely to offer him a longer term then I’d be comfortable with when he hits free agency in a couple of years.

 

Now of course it is possible no one is offering the pieces Chevy would want in return, but I would have to think there is a contender who would be interested in his services.   The one issue I do see is some of the contenders may not be able to take his cap hit of 5.2M.  While not an excessive salary in this day and age, with the rumors of the cap not going up a whole lot next year, teams that would normally be interested may not have the cap space to deal for him.  If this is the case, we wouldn’t be able to deal him until the trade deadline next season.

Maybe, maybe not. Regardless, imho, we trade Buff, we 'take from Peter, give to Paul' as the saying goes. Not to mention the fact (which you made somewhat) that most other teams are usually smart and will feel hard pressed to give up anything substantial WE NEED.   

 

Being 29/30 in this league is not really the same as it was 10/15 years ago. If he is taking care of himself (which is probably a whole other discussion), another 5-7 years of productivity is not out of the question. I say re-sign, he's too much of a special player not too. I think he likes it here, just a feeling. Doesn't seem to like the limelight all that much which he can usually get here compared to other cities. 

 

I have no doubt he liked it here.  My two caveats to that when he goes into his contract year would be 1) does he want to play D more than he wants to play F in Winnipeg for the rest of his career? 2) He's very close with Ladd and they will no doubt talk about their future plans...Ladd likes it here too, but liking it here and being close to home is one thing, maximizing the years you have left on a contender is something else.

 

I cant see Buff being an impact player at 37 years old.

[mbrg]

Can we now accept that the Jets have regressed? Pavs has regressed. We are well on our way to finishing just out of the playoffs again. Hopefully management is looking for opportunity to make changes rather then waiting another 20 games.

 

This is a pretty over-the-top level of drama for a team that lost 2 one-goal games in a row against 2 of the better teams in the league.  Some deep breaths should be taken.  Pavelec has the 11th best gaa in the league among starters, so if by regressed you mean gotten much better, then yes.

 

The team needs to score more goals.  It has the 3rd fewest in the league.  Despite that they sit 16th overall in the league.  If this team simply maintains everything about it's current level of play and improves the powerplay from second-worst in the league to average, it is probably good enough to make the playoffs.

 

Tim Stapleton once played an entire season here.  You seriously think this is just more of the same?  It's okay to be disappointed by a loss, but we should still keep our wits about us.

[The Unknown Poster]

Lost 4 of 5.   Look uninspired at various times.  Like anything its context.  A good team that gets destroyed once, you can over look it.  A team that is seemingly streaky, maybe you take a dep breath and wait for the positive streak.  But as good as the Jets have seemed, I believe their record is almost identitical to last season.  And thats with improvements to GA and save percentage.

 

I would not say its over the top drama to discuss the team.  Like seriously.  What do you guys want: "Tough loss for my beloved Jets last night but they are awesome and I love them."  I mean really...lol

 

Stapleton was pretty good and probably played for then the 3 minutes Halischuk played against St Louis.  Did we need to improve over the fourth line in the first season?  You bet.  Have we?  Not at all.  This is a fourth line that the Head Coach barely plays and the GM has made no effort to improve yet.  Might he?  Sure.  But when?

[Mr Dee]

It's better than - oh, we lost last night what should we do?

Why don't we trade somebody?

How about Buff?

Pavs?

Maurice?

Anybody…we have to do something…Damm the torpedoes…straight ahead.

 

Might as well take GM out of our alphabet, we don't have one anyways!!!

[sweep the leg]

 

Can we now accept that the Jets have regressed? Pavs has regressed. We are well on our way to finishing just out of the playoffs again. Hopefully management is looking for opportunity to make changes rather then waiting another 20 games.

 

This is a pretty over-the-top level of drama for a team that lost 2 one-goal games in a row against 2 of the better teams in the league.  Some deep breaths should be taken.  Pavelec has the 11th best gaa in the league among starters, so if by regressed you mean gotten much better, then yes.

 

The team needs to score more goals.  It has the 3rd fewest in the league.  Despite that they sit 16th overall in the league.  If this team simply maintains everything about it's current level of play and improves the powerplay from second-worst in the league to average, it is probably good enough to make the playoffs.

 

Tim Stapleton once played an entire season here.  You seriously think this is just more of the same?  It's okay to be disappointed by a loss, but we should still keep our wits about us.

 

Agreed. I'll save panic time for if we struggle through our next five games. That's a pretty weak stretch of opponents who we should be able to string some wins up against.

 

What made you choose Stapleton as your example? We've had players on our team that were worse than him, like that plug we traded to the Habs for example.

[mbrg]

Drama to discuss the team?  No, drama to say "Can we now accept the jets have regressed?" when they are very clearly better.  Or that Pavelec "has regressed" when he's playing at a level he has never come close to before in his NHL career.

 

You want the context?  They have lost 4 of their last 5, that is the occurrence.  The context?  All by one goal.  One against the team with the fewest goals against in the NHL.  One against the team tied with the second fewest goals against in the NHL.  One in overtime in back-to-back games with an early start time against the other team tied with the second fewest goals in the NHL.  And one against a team with the 8th fewest goals against in the NHL.

 

The combined goals for and against of the 4 teams they lost to?  + 46.  The Jets have played hard and lost close 1 goal games in 4 of their last 5, against some of the best competition in the NHL.  Apparently all you will read in that sentence is "The Jets....lost".  They lost 4 of their last 5.  They did not serve up a stinker or anything close to one in any of those.

 

They are not on the same level as those teams but are playing them close and fighting hard.  Is losing to them "regression"?  Only if you were deluded enough to think the Jets were going to be an elite team this year.  They will win some against the best teams but lose more, because they are not among the best.  And some nights it will be by much more than 1 goal.  And some nights a bottom-feeder team will play them just as hard as they played the Penguins.  And some nights the Jets will lay the boots to a lesser team, like they did to the Coyotes.  Not one of those games on it's own will be the entirety of what the Jets are.  5 games is not the entirety of what the Jets are.

 

 

 

(and Tim Stapleton did not play on the 4th line, but if you think he was on par with Scheiffle, Frolik or Lowry, have at er I guess.  Go ahead and try to make a compelling argument for that.  That should be pretty amusing.  I'll just grin and shake my head.)

[mbrg]

What made you choose Stapleton as your example? We've had players on our team that were worse than him, like that plug we traded to the Habs for example.

 

Hmm.  I'm not trying to pick on Stapleton.  He was what he was, a guy who despite having some skill level and some speed, didn't have enough of either to make up for his lack of size.  He landed a job in the NHL.  Good on him for that.  When I watched him play I didn't think he was particularly better than some of the guys I played against in my old rec hockey league.  I'm not being an ass, some of the guys in my old rec hockey league played in the WHL and AHL for a while.  Stapleton is good enough to carve out a 10-15 year career in the Swiss league.  That's actually pretty darn good.  But this is the NHL.

 

When people claim that the Jets haven't gotten any better I think back to guys on the roster in the first 2 years.  Stapleton, Wellwood, guys like that immediately come to mind.  Guys that we were lining up with Kane.  I repeat, we lined these guys up with Kane!  Laughing off those claims is pretty easy if you just look at those first rosters we put out.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

I say they stay on course... patience is important...  rarely do you see any team have a great many years of success by making trades with non superstar players....

 

 

I'd be shocked if anyone from the 4th line made it back next year.

[Rich]

 

I say they stay on course... patience is important...  rarely do you see any team have a great many years of success by making trades with non superstar players....

 

 

I'd be shocked if anyone from the 4th line made it back next year.

 

 

Thorby is locked up for a couple more.   Still don't understand that contract.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

 

 

I say they stay on course... patience is important...  rarely do you see any team have a great many years of success by making trades with non superstar players....

 

 

I'd be shocked if anyone from the 4th line made it back next year.

 

 

Thorby is locked up for a couple more.   Still don't understand that contract.

 

Well on 1290 this morning they threw out a theory that he got it as a result of being buddy buddy with Kane.

[Rich]

Shame on Chevy if that is why he was signed.

[The Unknown Poster]

It's better than - oh, we lost last night what should we do?

Why don't we trade somebody?

How about Buff?

Pavs?

Maurice?

Anybody…we have to do something…Damm the torpedoes…straight ahead.

 

Might as well take GM out of our alphabet, we don't have one anyways!!!

 

Im not sure who in this discussion thread put forth this panic response, so Im not sure this post is relevant.  In a general sense, I agree with you.  I used to post on a Jets forum and it was constant anti-Chevy, lets trade everyone mentality and I always argued against that.  There was a twitter thing this summer #WhatDidChevyDo ie. nothing and it was pretty clueless.  And while we couldnt panic after the first few games and its still "early", we have 1/4 of the season in the books so its enough games to see a trend.  This team is absolutely not good enough.

[The Unknown Poster]

Drama to discuss the team?  No, drama to say "Can we now accept the jets have regressed?" when they are very clearly better.  Or that Pavelec "has regressed" when he's playing at a level he has never come close to before in his NHL career.

 

You want the context?  They have lost 4 of their last 5, that is the occurrence.  The context?  All by one goal.  One against the team with the fewest goals against in the NHL.  One against the team tied with the second fewest goals against in the NHL.  One in overtime in back-to-back games with an early start time against the other team tied with the second fewest goals in the NHL.  And one against a team with the 8th fewest goals against in the NHL.

 

The combined goals for and against of the 4 teams they lost to?  + 46.  The Jets have played hard and lost close 1 goal games in 4 of their last 5, against some of the best competition in the NHL.  Apparently all you will read in that sentence is "The Jets....lost".  They lost 4 of their last 5.  They did not serve up a stinker or anything close to one in any of those.

 

They are not on the same level as those teams but are playing them close and fighting hard.  Is losing to them "regression"?  Only if you were deluded enough to think the Jets were going to be an elite team this year.  They will win some against the best teams but lose more, because they are not among the best.  And some nights it will be by much more than 1 goal.  And some nights a bottom-feeder team will play them just as hard as they played the Penguins.  And some nights the Jets will lay the boots to a lesser team, like they did to the Coyotes.  Not one of those games on it's own will be the entirety of what the Jets are.  5 games is not the entirety of what the Jets are.

 

 

 

(and Tim Stapleton did not play on the 4th line, but if you think he was on par with Scheiffle, Frolik or Lowry, have at er I guess.  Go ahead and try to make a compelling argument for that.  That should be pretty amusing.  I'll just grin and shake my head.)

 

The team has regressed from the stretch of games that saw them climb into 3rd place in the Central.  Perhaps a better choice of words would be "can we now say this team is the same as it has been for four years".  We've changed the players.  We've changes the coach.  And yet the record is nearly identical.  Everyone wanted to say "this is the real Jets" when they were winning.  My point is, losing one or two means nothing but this stretch of losing 4 out of 5 and the way they've done it shows me the team has "regressed" back to where they were.  One goal games or not..a loss is a loss.  if they were losses like the Pens loss, so be it.  They arent.  Pavs Save Percentage is a wonderful .893 or whatever these past few games and he's looked shaky.  Im a Pavs guy...and even Im at the point where Im saying is Pavs the goalie we see 45 games a season that is barely average or the goalie we see 20 games a season that is great?

 

That first season, the Jets' depth was awful and we had fourth line players playing 3rd line.  No one is arguing that.  But to use Stapleton as an example of improved players is moot.  At worst it contributes to my argument that the Jets are a lousy team since they replaced those guys and arent any better.  if I was you, I'd use the example of replacing Jokinen with Perrault.  Thats a significant upgrade.  Looks good.  Makes the line better.  Makes the team better.  helps the puck posession game.  And yet the team has no more wins.

 

I want to be wrong.  I just dont think I am.  And my...not frustration, but agitation is that management doesnt appear to be addressing any key issues.  They were pretty friggen lucky Hutch has turned out because they took a chance on a guy with 3 NHL games on his resume as a back up behind a below average starter.  The fourth line barely plays and they've done nothing but reward a 4th line guy with a big contract.  I dont get that.  The Jets are in the position to be able to take better talent from other teams who have better depth but want to shed some salary...why we dont is beyond me.

[The Unknown Poster]

Shame on Chevy if that is why he was signed.

 

ive heard the following in regards to why Thorburn was signed:

 

- Buddy with Kane/makes Kane happy/keeps Kane out of trouble

- Very close with Chipman/Chipman sees Thorburn as a lifer

- Fantastic locker room guy/loss of Thurburn would hurt morale

 

I dont know if I buy any of those.  I think management saw him last year, saw him fill in for Kane and not really get exposed (though he didnt really make that line any better nor should he have been expected to) and "rewarded" him.  I dont really care about the contract because it's a million bucks, who cares.  If he's a saint in the locker room, great, make him a career 12/13 forward who comes into the game every few games when someone gets hurt or we need a shake up.  But playing a guy who's playing 3-5 minutes a game?

 

And its not just him.  Halischuk (who I like) played 3 minutes last game.  Really?  We dont have an option the coach trusts more in St Johns?  It just makes you wonder.  When they win, no one cares.  But the questions will come if they dont perform well on this road trip.  Because if the coach isnt playing the fourth line, it means we need a better fourth line.  if the GM isnt improving those guys, what message is that sending?  We were told part of bringing in Maurice last season was to do an in depth analysis of the roster....I guess he liked everyone.

[Rich]

 

Drama to discuss the team?  No, drama to say "Can we now accept the jets have regressed?" when they are very clearly better.  Or that Pavelec "has regressed" when he's playing at a level he has never come close to before in his NHL career.

 

You want the context?  They have lost 4 of their last 5, that is the occurrence.  The context?  All by one goal.  One against the team with the fewest goals against in the NHL.  One against the team tied with the second fewest goals against in the NHL.  One in overtime in back-to-back games with an early start time against the other team tied with the second fewest goals in the NHL.  And one against a team with the 8th fewest goals against in the NHL.

 

The combined goals for and against of the 4 teams they lost to?  + 46.  The Jets have played hard and lost close 1 goal games in 4 of their last 5, against some of the best competition in the NHL.  Apparently all you will read in that sentence is "The Jets....lost".  They lost 4 of their last 5.  They did not serve up a stinker or anything close to one in any of those.

 

They are not on the same level as those teams but are playing them close and fighting hard.  Is losing to them "regression"?  Only if you were deluded enough to think the Jets were going to be an elite team this year.  They will win some against the best teams but lose more, because they are not among the best.  And some nights it will be by much more than 1 goal.  And some nights a bottom-feeder team will play them just as hard as they played the Penguins.  And some nights the Jets will lay the boots to a lesser team, like they did to the Coyotes.  Not one of those games on it's own will be the entirety of what the Jets are.  5 games is not the entirety of what the Jets are.

 

 

 

(and Tim Stapleton did not play on the 4th line, but if you think he was on par with Scheiffle, Frolik or Lowry, have at er I guess.  Go ahead and try to make a compelling argument for that.  That should be pretty amusing.  I'll just grin and shake my head.)

 

The team has regressed from the stretch of games that saw them climb into 3rd place in the Central.  Perhaps a better choice of words would be "can we now say this team is the same as it has been for four years".  We've changed the players.  We've changes the coach.  And yet the record is nearly identical.  Everyone wanted to say "this is the real Jets" when they were winning.  My point is, losing one or two means nothing but this stretch of losing 4 out of 5 and the way they've done it shows me the team has "regressed" back to where they were.  One goal games or not..a loss is a loss.  if they were losses like the Pens loss, so be it.  They arent.  Pavs Save Percentage is a wonderful .893 or whatever these past few games and he's looked shaky.  Im a Pavs guy...and even Im at the point where Im saying is Pavs the goalie we see 45 games a season that is barely average or the goalie we see 20 games a season that is great?

 

That first season, the Jets' depth was awful and we had fourth line players playing 3rd line.  No one is arguing that.  But to use Stapleton as an example of improved players is moot.  At worst it contributes to my argument that the Jets are a lousy team since they replaced those guys and arent any better.  if I was you, I'd use the example of replacing Jokinen with Perrault.  Thats a significant upgrade.  Looks good.  Makes the line better.  Makes the team better.  helps the puck posession game.  And yet the team has no more wins.

 

I want to be wrong.  I just dont think I am.  And my...not frustration, but agitation is that management doesnt appear to be addressing any key issues.  They were pretty friggen lucky Hutch has turned out because they took a chance on a guy with 3 NHL games on his resume as a back up behind a below average starter.  The fourth line barely plays and they've done nothing but reward a 4th line guy with a big contract.  I dont get that.  The Jets are in the position to be able to take better talent from other teams who have better depth but want to shed some salary...why we dont is beyond me.

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you say.   Chevy needs to start using everything at his disposal, including trading, to make this team better.  The Frolik deal was good, but that is really all he has done trade wise to make this team better in 4 years.  People who point to bad trades that GMs make overlook the GMs who make good trades for their team (look at Dallas).   Your job as a GM is to assess and evaluate talent and being able to negotiate those deals.  Not every trade is bad for your team.  The cupboards here are no longer bare, they've filled them with prospects and picks ... time to start using them.

 

However they did get a backup plan in case Hutch didn't pan out.  Budaj is still down at the Rock and he would be called up if Hutch didn't turn out.   He was the backup plan for at least this year till one of the other youngsters would be able to step up.  Glad to see Hutch doing well though.

[Rich]

 

Shame on Chevy if that is why he was signed.

 

ive heard the following in regards to why Thorburn was signed:

 

- Buddy with Kane/makes Kane happy/keeps Kane out of trouble

- Very close with Chipman/Chipman sees Thorburn as a lifer

- Fantastic locker room guy/loss of Thurburn would hurt morale

 

I dont know if I buy any of those.  I think management saw him last year, saw him fill in for Kane and not really get exposed (though he didnt really make that line any better nor should he have been expected to) and "rewarded" him.  I dont really care about the contract because it's a million bucks, who cares.  If he's a saint in the locker room, great, make him a career 12/13 forward who comes into the game every few games when someone gets hurt or we need a shake up.  But playing a guy who's playing 3-5 minutes a game?

 

And its not just him.  Halischuk (who I like) played 3 minutes last game.  Really?  We dont have an option the coach trusts more in St Johns?  It just makes you wonder.  When they win, no one cares.  But the questions will come if they dont perform well on this road trip.  Because if the coach isnt playing the fourth line, it means we need a better fourth line.  if the GM isnt improving those guys, what message is that sending?  We were told part of bringing in Maurice last season was to do an in depth analysis of the roster....I guess he liked everyone.

 

 

They played a clip on TSN1290 this morning where Maurice said not to look at it as he doesn't want to play the 4th line, but look at it like he wants to play the other 3 more.  He basically said he doesn't want to take minutes away from the other 3 lines.  Which is all fine and good, but then don't use the excuse of your team being too tired as a reason why they lost or played poorly.  You can't have it both ways.

[sweep the leg]

Yeah, the 4th line not playing is more b/c of Maurice's philosophy than them being worse than every other teams' 4th line. We don't have the best 4th line in the game, but it's certainly not the worst either.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

Shame on Chevy if that is why he was signed.

 

ive heard the following in regards to why Thorburn was signed:

 

- Buddy with Kane/makes Kane happy/keeps Kane out of trouble

- Very close with Chipman/Chipman sees Thorburn as a lifer

- Fantastic locker room guy/loss of Thurburn would hurt morale

 

I dont know if I buy any of those.  I think management saw him last year, saw him fill in for Kane and not really get exposed (though he didnt really make that line any better nor should he have been expected to) and "rewarded" him.  I dont really care about the contract because it's a million bucks, who cares.  If he's a saint in the locker room, great, make him a career 12/13 forward who comes into the game every few games when someone gets hurt or we need a shake up.  But playing a guy who's playing 3-5 minutes a game?

 

And its not just him.  Halischuk (who I like) played 3 minutes last game.  Really?  We dont have an option the coach trusts more in St Johns?  It just makes you wonder.  When they win, no one cares.  But the questions will come if they dont perform well on this road trip.  Because if the coach isnt playing the fourth line, it means we need a better fourth line.  if the GM isnt improving those guys, what message is that sending?  We were told part of bringing in Maurice last season was to do an in depth analysis of the roster....I guess he liked everyone.

 

 

They played a clip on TSN1290 this morning where Maurice said not to look at it as he doesn't want to play the 4th line, but look at it like he wants to play the other 3 more.  He basically said he doesn't want to take minutes away from the other 3 lines.  Which is all fine and good, but then don't use the excuse of your team being too tired as a reason why they lost or played poorly.  You can't have it both ways.

 

Yeah I heard that too and it was pretty suspect.  Sounds like Maurice protecting the team a bit.  If the fourth line is good enough, then they dont have to play the other three lines more.  Someone posted stats showing the fourthline zone starts too, showing them being protected.  Clearly little trust on the part of the coach.

 

And I agree with what you wrote in your previous post too.  if we accept this idea of a "five year plan", we can wait til next season and when the team is still a middling at best team then what?  Do we blow it up?  The Jets are unique in that they sort of have two "cores".  There is the "Atlanta Core" and then the guys they've brought in/drafted.  I just dont see the value in keeping a player like Buff on a team that routinely misses the playoffs.

 

The Blues drafted two of their top line players, Tarasenko and Schwartz in the 2010 draft, a year they missed the playoffs.  In fact it was the end of a stretch of them only making the playoffs once in six years.  Now they are a powerhouse.  And those two are big time top line leaders four years after being drafted.

 

But we will continue to be patient while our big draftee from 2011 plays on the third line and is actually getting worse as a player this season.

[The Unknown Poster]

Yeah, the 4th line not playing is more b/c of Maurice's philosophy than them being worse than every other teams' 4th line. We don't have the best 4th line in the game, but it's certainly not the worst either.

So if we had the best fourth line in hockey, Maurice would still barely play them?