JP51

You can tell i am jaded after all of these years reality is kids 18 let's see he does have size you can't teach but all to often we get these size players like we have mentioned and they are just not the nasty aggressive hard to play against type we want. This kid isn't coming out with a narrative that says that. So I assume the worst but I need to back off on the assumption and wait for it to play out... bottom line is I am not colored inspired with this pick and am more concerned with the direction of the FO in making it... like do they see we need more ass$*les ? Time will tell

Yes I know this and have said it before for sure... I think my sentiment was if they are in active shoe string mode that's bad if they are in gather money to try and take a big swing then good the difference is in the attitude not the result. Bottom line is one big hit doesn't change it all... they need consistent transformative positive change in attitude toughness and skill as well as experience

I dont hate it i just want some nasty I liked Bear but he is 18 let's see Omg I forgot and Smehlik

Cannot believe we took the reincarnation of Tyler Myers, Uwe Krupp and Owen Power over him wait yes I can I dont hate it i just want some nasty

Wonder if that's not the rub here

Question does this two year contract keep him in the RFA group when done?

Lol or maybe Campbell on Umberger 🤣

Which one... the flat footed or head down LOL 🤣 ... still laughing over here.

He totally got me... like flat footed, head down, admiring my pass... BOOM! LOL @Thorny Oh you! you totally got me... totally ... well played... I stand by my thoughts, I literally have no idea what TP is thinking.... but clearly they were unnecessary... 🤣

Well you may be correct, I would say if he takes positive steps this year ( and that would mean a playoff appearance I would bet he is back... if we stagnate or get worse... who knows he still could be back... I dont get Pegula... but I would say that would be a tough one for him to swallow... but honestly, I dont know if he is on the hot seat... cause I dont know what is in Pegula's brain... I just dont..

Then our views totally coincide... because a blockbuster with a major player is probably a heavy lift... we need more than one player.. and more than one player is needed to turn this ship... consistent positive steps forward to improvement is the only way to establish credibility... you cannot fake time... nor consistency... getting Ekblad or Mariner doesnt magically rescue all that is wrong... So, I mean if a deal is there big time to help do it... but your problems are not solved with one pen stroke... it took a long time to get into this mess its gonna take effort to get out.

I agree... I know it is completely impractical to compare him to his father... its not fair or reasonable ... but here I am imagining if he can even approximate that type of player... I am getting caught up on the name... I know... but I just have a feeling about this kid.

This to me is a major major question... in my post I said if we did this to save money.. we have pain ahead... but if we did this to free up money for a big swing.. well then something different.

This is an issue... bottom line is we need to correct the reason that players want out... and that is winning and the over all team cohesiveness... I do not know if this helps or hurts the issue... but it is to me just as bad forcing players to stay that desperately want out.. so.. kinda rock and hard place... to me bottom line what ever it takes to correct the real issue needs to be addressed... I do not know if this moves the needle... but I hope it does...

Torn... I dont think we got enough... part of me worries we intentionally took less to reduce salary, if we did I hate that... as it bodes nothing but more pain if we are taking that do it on a shoe string tact.... Losing Peterka, I know we all worry about what he will become... I get it... but to me lamenting over players that we sent off doesnt really cut it as long as we became better as a result... I would say we have seen many trades that were neutral or net loss... this on paper is a net loss to me... however, what was JJ like in the locker room... was this a Campbell trade or a Roy trade... did we add by subtracting.... time will tell so if the question is right now, I have to throw this out.. cause we just dont know. Return, although it seems we left assets/return on the table and many of the pundits say we could have gotten more (but really do any of us know) I like the acknowledgement of we need skill that is hard to play against... I think this was clearly a move in that direction... so I cannot disagree with the concept... So right now I am a wait and see mode like you have for most trades... but feet to the fire, I lean yes simply because we need a culture change drastically, the overall team toughness needs to increase by multiples and this trade acknowledges that... Lastly, I hate that we have to find a pairing for our overall No 1 pick in Power... but we do... pairing him with a more physical type Dman may let him do what he does best and my hope is that he can emulate a bit more physicality as well...

Hey I heard none of that but I trust you here if so happy for the info. Let's see how these trades turn out in time. But you may be right he may be a mess in Ottawa too I just know he started out quite strong

Not sure what you are saying or asking

Well to be fair.. Cozens looked better in Ottawa for sure than Buffalo... Skinner did go to a cup final... but certainly didnt contribute... Mitts was surprising, he started the year top 10 in scoring and then crashed and burned... he seemed like he was progressing here and then boom...

I definitely think money may have come in to play here...

I have been raging for grit and size talent attitude combination... getting Rossi makes us smaller... as much as I would like to bite... I gotta go with I like the prospect of having people on this team that will engage people with purpose who knows if any one of us is right, time will tell... maybe we should have... but I think I at least like the acknowledgement that there needs to be some aggression in the line up.

I think your last point is big... how does this play in the locker room... if it serves to discourage and disgruntle players big mistake huge.... if it is addition by subtraction and players like the fact that we are getting some folks that will actually initiate contact and not hide under the bench and we get some grit well then it may be the right move... I think I said before, I think talent wise we lost... the only way we will is if the addition enhances the chemistry and attitude of the team and if the subtraction helps send that message. But I think the result will be seen in the locker room over time. To be continued...

I agree at this point this is a net loss on paper... the only way this helps us is if the infusion of players that are harder to play against and increased chemistry on the team changes the trend of the team... talentwise its a net loss currently with Doan being future upside to even that out or you believe Peterka was the problem and this was addition by subtraction... (Diggs, Roy etc....) it was not a hockey trade in which sent multiple players for the better player.. it was the opposite attempt to accumulate value in multiples likely again because most trades in which we get the better player will be nixed due to NMCs. It is our plight..

I would even say if Doan gives us 15g 25a plays both ends and makes us harder to play against and continues with his upside and Peterka goes 30 and 30 I am still fine. We must get better in the D zone... like now.

He is a player that has played 62 games in the NHL last 2 years... averaging about 13 minutes of ice time... he is not yet a full time NHLer playing over 1/3 of his games in the AHL last year... to me that is a developing NHL prospect. I do not think we have seen the overall NHL potential of him and however unlikely are not assured he will be a full time NHLer he has to make it and secure a spot.. (that said I see little chance of him not making it) . So I am not sure what is not to get except maybe our definition of prospect is different.. like if they play in the NHL for a certain number of games they are no longer a prospect in your definition... ok then change my term to what ever you call that level player... to me until I see a full season in the NHL full time I myself refer to that person as a prospect. The point is that we hope we do not have a fully developed player, that he will play in the NHL full time this season, and we hope his production and ice time will increase...

I would love that to but to be real Marner has the likelihood of considering us as Angelina Jolie has the likelihood of considering me no matter how much money is offered... LOL... we just dumped a future 40 goal scorer for a middling player and a prospect... because no real player will come here... likely the same will happen with Byram and we will have gotten appreciably worse as a team... why would Mariner to come to a current bottom feeder thats digging deeper... with a FO office and owner who are absolutely incompetent...