Let's Go Blues

A-Yo! wrote:Uh oh...EJ is a late scratch...Has the trade been done already? LOL

What if EJ's agent has made it clear that they intend to receive offer sheets from other clubs to establish value?

Maybe JD would rather trade him now and get an offensive stud in return. It's not unthinkable to trade EJ if his cap hit would be too high in his next contract. If this involved Kovalchuk then I would be all for it (contract assurance of course).

not_a_wings_fan wrote:Am I correct that nearly every D-man in peoria is a L shot? The only other righty that fits the bill is Polak, and I would trade him if we got back a scorer.

After watching Johnson this season, I see no way that you can trade him.

At this point Johnson has played about 1.5 seasons (~120 games) of NHL hockey and no postseason games. He has continued to get better this season, and shows no signs that I can see of reaching a plateau.

As he gets better over the coming years you are looking at a Norris Trophy-type player imo. The question becomes which is more valuable/harder to find - a 30-40 goal scorer (Semin) or a #1 Defenseman with offensive upside?

It's harder to find an amputee goalie...

The only question is which is more important to a Cup winner; the scorer or the D-man?

If Johnson, Kovalchuk, Stamkos, Tavares, Cane, Crosby and Ovechkin were all in the same draft - who do you think would get picked last? While there's no accounting for individual team needs, I think Johnson would be the 'least desired' among those players for a hypothetical 'average' NHL team.

Johnson was seen as the defensive equivalent of those guys (perhaps not Crosby's level), but his role is marginalized in the new(ish) NHL. Then you have to consider our own system - we have built a very nice group of young D-men in the minors. If any team in the league can live with losing EJ, it's the Blues.

The Pens have this figured out - goalies and scoring. With the defensive depth in our system and the lack of an elite forward anywhere to be found, this is a deal you should consider making even without throwing in a top-shelf goalie prospect.

Ultimately, I wouldn't take it straight up, as Semin has reached an age where he is what he is (see: Boyes). At 26 yrs old, he's not going to become more than a 35 goal scorer most years, with the potential to pot 40+ from time to time. Now that's incredibly valuable, but it also represents his high side. As a guy with a reputation as a floater and some injury history, there's significant downside here. He's also going to be paid very very well in the near future and if we're going to give him that kind of scratch, we might as well try to go the UFA route first and not lose our cornerstone D-man in the process. Even if we can't keep EJ as an RFA, we'll get a nice pick package for him. So it's not as though we have to worry about losing him for nothing.

However, if Varlamov is included, I think you pull the trigger. He looks like a great prospect and a guy that could anchor us between the pipes for years.

Oz-iz-God wrote:

not_a_wings_fan wrote:Am I correct that nearly every D-man in peoria is a L shot? The only other righty that fits the bill is Polak, and I would trade him if we got back a scorer.

After watching Johnson this season, I see no way that you can trade him.

At this point Johnson has played about 1.5 seasons (~120 games) of NHL hockey and no postseason games. He has continued to get better this season, and shows no signs that I can see of reaching a plateau.

As he gets better over the coming years you are looking at a Norris Trophy-type player imo. The question becomes which is more valuable/harder to find - a 30-40 goal scorer (Semin) or a #1 Defenseman with offensive upside?

It's harder to find an amputee goalie...

The only question is which is more important to a Cup winner; the scorer or the D-man?

If Johnson, Kovalchuk, Stamkos, Tavares, Cane, Crosby and Ovechkin were all in the same draft - who do you think would get picked last? While there's no accounting for individual team needs, I think Johnson would be the 'least desired' among those players for a hypothetical 'average' NHL team.

Johnson was seen as the defensive equivalent of those guys (perhaps not Crosby's level), but his role is marginalized in the new(ish) NHL. Then you have to consider our own system - we have built a very nice group of young D-men in the minors. If any team in the league can live with losing EJ, it's the Blues.

The Pens have this figured out - goalies and scoring. With the defensive depth in our system and the lack of an elite forward anywhere to be found, this is a deal you should consider making even without throwing in a top-shelf goalie prospect.

Ultimately, I wouldn't take it straight up, as Varlamov has reached an age where he is what he is (see: Boyes). At 26 yrs old, he's not going to become more than a 35 goal scorer most years, with the potential to pot 40+ from time to time. Now that's incredibly valuable, but it also represents his high side. As a guy with a reputation as a floater and some injury history, there's significant downside here. He's also going to be paid very very well in the near future and if we're going to give him that kind of scratch, we might as well try to go the UFA route first and not lose our cornerstone D-man in the process. Even if we can't keep EJ as an RFA, we'll get a nice pick package for him. So it's not as though we have to worry about losing him for nothing.

However, if Varlamov is included, I think you pull the trigger. He looks like a great prospect and a guy that could anchor us between the pipes for years.

If Varlamov can pot 35 goals a season, I say take it. Where else are you going to get that much production from your goalie?

Oz-iz-God wrote:If Johnson, Kovalchuk, Stamkos, Tavares, Cane, Crosby and Ovechkin were all in the same draft - who do you think would get picked last? While there's no accounting for individual team needs, I think Johnson would be the 'least desired' among those players for a hypothetical 'average' NHL team.

Actually, I think Kane would have been taken last, and Johnson 2nd to last. I would rate the #1 picks as such.

1) Ovechkin (there was just as much anticipation for Ovy, but not as much hype because he wasn't Canadian).
2) Crosby
3) Kovalchuk
4) Stamkos
5) Tavares (Tavares' stock dropped his draft eligible year)
6) Johnson (he was the top pick out of a very strong top of the draft: Staal, Toews, Backstrom, Kessel).
7) Kane (he was the best of a much weaker class (Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Hickey, Alzner)

glen a richter wrote:

Oz-iz-God wrote:

not_a_wings_fan wrote:Am I correct that nearly every D-man in peoria is a L shot? The only other righty that fits the bill is Polak, and I would trade him if we got back a scorer.

After watching Johnson this season, I see no way that you can trade him.

At this point Johnson has played about 1.5 seasons (~120 games) of NHL hockey and no postseason games. He has continued to get better this season, and shows no signs that I can see of reaching a plateau.

As he gets better over the coming years you are looking at a Norris Trophy-type player imo. The question becomes which is more valuable/harder to find - a 30-40 goal scorer (Semin) or a #1 Defenseman with offensive upside?

It's harder to find an amputee goalie...

The only question is which is more important to a Cup winner; the scorer or the D-man?

If Johnson, Kovalchuk, Stamkos, Tavares, Cane, Crosby and Ovechkin were all in the same draft - who do you think would get picked last? While there's no accounting for individual team needs, I think Johnson would be the 'least desired' among those players for a hypothetical 'average' NHL team.

Johnson was seen as the defensive equivalent of those guys (perhaps not Crosby's level), but his role is marginalized in the new(ish) NHL. Then you have to consider our own system - we have built a very nice group of young D-men in the minors. If any team in the league can live with losing EJ, it's the Blues.

The Pens have this figured out - goalies and scoring. With the defensive depth in our system and the lack of an elite forward anywhere to be found, this is a deal you should consider making even without throwing in a top-shelf goalie prospect.

Ultimately, I wouldn't take it straight up, as Varlamov has reached an age where he is what he is (see: Boyes). At 26 yrs old, he's not going to become more than a 35 goal scorer most years, with the potential to pot 40+ from time to time. Now that's incredibly valuable, but it also represents his high side. As a guy with a reputation as a floater and some injury history, there's significant downside here. He's also going to be paid very very well in the near future and if we're going to give him that kind of scratch, we might as well try to go the UFA route first and not lose our cornerstone D-man in the process. Even if we can't keep EJ as an RFA, we'll get a nice pick package for him. So it's not as though we have to worry about losing him for nothing.

However, if Varlamov is included, I think you pull the trigger. He looks like a great prospect and a guy that could anchor us between the pipes for years.

If Varlamov can pot 35 goals a season, I say take it. Where else are you going to get that much production from your goalie?

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Oz-iz-God wrote:If Johnson, Kovalchuk, Stamkos, Tavares, Cane, Crosby and Ovechkin were all in the same draft - who do you think would get picked last? While there's no accounting for individual team needs, I think Johnson would be the 'least desired' among those players for a hypothetical 'average' NHL team.

Actually, I think Kane would have been taken last, and Johnson 2nd to last. I would rate the #1 picks as such.

1) Ovechkin (there was just as much anticipation for Ovy, but not as much hype because he wasn't Canadian).
2) Crosby
3) Kovalchuk
4) Stamkos
5) Tavares (Tavares' stock dropped his draft eligible year)
6) Johnson (he was the top pick out of a very strong top of the draft: Staal, Toews, Backstrom, Kessel).
7) Kane (he was the best of a much weaker class (Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Hickey, Alzner)

Fair point regarding Kane, Johnson and Kane would certainly be 6a and 6b; very close call either way.

But the point remains, scorers are more important than ever before in this league. Top line scorers, depth on defense and an elite goalie is what's getting it done. We have the pieces for the defensive depth, we'd get another attempt at an elite young goalie and we'd be a little closer to having the excellent offense the NHL now demands.

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Oz-iz-God wrote:If Johnson, Kovalchuk, Stamkos, Tavares, Cane, Crosby and Ovechkin were all in the same draft - who do you think would get picked last? While there's no accounting for individual team needs, I think Johnson would be the 'least desired' among those players for a hypothetical 'average' NHL team.

Actually, I think Kane would have been taken last, and Johnson 2nd to last. I would rate the #1 picks as such.

1) Ovechkin (there was just as much anticipation for Ovy, but not as much hype because he wasn't Canadian).
2) Crosby
3) Kovalchuk
4) Stamkos
5) Tavares (Tavares' stock dropped his draft eligible year)
6) Johnson (he was the top pick out of a very strong top of the draft: Staal, Toews, Backstrom, Kessel).
7) Kane (he was the best of a much weaker class (Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Hickey, Alzner)

Examining the picks listed, there's that other entangible as the "face of the franchise." That can be any number of ways- dominating offense, longest tenure badass dman, brick wall goalie, whatever.

Point is, the Blues still don't have that. There's not that ONE GUY on this team everyone immediately looks to. Many franchise owners look to that guy to sell tickets and market their team. On that list: Ovechkin obviously, Crosby, Kovalchuk debateable but I think he is (or at the very least HAS been), Stamkos no, Tavares will be, EJ the jury is still out, and the Kane-Toews double-team in the @$$ of all Chicago fans is probably unmatched in terms of fan recognition in the league.

There aren't many things the Blues are missing but that's one of them. Ever since #2 hung 'em up for us, the Blues have been fumbling in the dark for someone like that and it's not on the horizon I don't think

Um, hey, great work with the mock draft... BUT those aren't "30-40" goal scorers on that list. If you asked me to trade him for a FIFTY goal scorer it's a different question. There wasn't a clear 50 goal guy in Johnson's draft year... that's why he was the #1 draft pick.

I don't think Johnson for Semin is a good move. Johnson (or Johnson and a prospect) for what turns out to be two 30-40 goal guys, or one 50 goal guy, I make that trade.

not_a_wings_fan wrote:Um, hey, great work with the mock draft... BUT those aren't "30-40" goal scorers on that list. If you asked me to trade him for a FIFTY goal scorer it's a different question. There wasn't a clear 50 goal guy in Johnson's draft year... that's why he was the #1 draft pick.

I don't think Johnson for Semin is a good move. Johnson (or Johnson and a prospect) for what turns out to be two 30-40 goal guys, or one 50 goal guy, I make that trade.

That wasn't the point.

The point was to show the value of attributes. Most GMs in the league would value the elite scorers over the elite D-men. Johnson was seen as the D-man equivalent of those scoring prospects and those guys would likely have still been taken ahead of him.

Johnson for a franchise goaltender would be a good move straight across. Johnson for a franchise goaltender and a 30-40 goal scorer is a move you make without hesitation.

It's probably moot, Theodore's not getting any younger, they'll need to keep Varlamov around for the future. For the near-term, they can get a D-man nearly as good as Johnson is now without having to give up nearly as much as Semin/Varlamov.

For where they are in the competition cycle, dealing a pick for a solid veteran makes a lot more sense than dealing their 2nd best scorer and backup goalie for EJ.

cprice12 wrote:Here's his response...

Semin is more talented than Ovechkin but he can kill you some nights as well when he plays lazy hockey.

Uh, I seriously doubt that.