March 1, 201510 yr comment_110492 Interesting. I guess they saw all they needed from Klingberg. Playoff depth.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110516 Always thought Klingberg was horrible. This deal is essentially a free Stempniak for me, and I love it. Chevy took advantage of NYR making that Yandle deal and found a way to allow it to benefit us. Awesome.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110517 Yeah during that Dallas game Klingberg looked lost. Good to see the Jets get a starter for a guy that was permanently a third liner on the Ice Caps.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110523 Engblom had said the Jets had tried to sign him during the off season. Jes sure played on a lot of teams i m guessing they signed him purely so they don't have to use Pardy on forward. Klingberg is an AHL lifer... Jaffray 2.0 With reports on how crappy he looked at practice its not a surprise.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110528 The degree to which Chevy is bolstering this lineup surprises me. Not that Stempniak and Tlusty are marquee players, but they can play legit 2nd and 3rd line NHL minutes on their bad days, and on their good days have put up pretty decent numbers. And considering what we gave up to get them? Solid trades, even if both are pending UFA's. Klingberg's future was as the next 3rd/4th liner we complain about once Thorburn is gone, and a 3rd and a 5th for Tlusty? Pretty good trades for the Jets. Landing UFA's without significantly impacting the future - those are exactly the kind of trades every contending GM should be trying to make. I'm glad ours is.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110536 The degree to which Chevy is bolstering this lineup surprises me. Not that Stempniak and Tlusty are marquee players, but they can play legit 2nd and 3rd line NHL minutes on their bad days, and on their good days have put up pretty decent numbers. And considering what we gave up to get them? Solid trades, even if both are pending UFA's. Klingberg's future was as the next 3rd/4th liner we complain about once Thorburn is gone, and a 3rd and a 5th for Tlusty? Pretty good trades for the Jets. Landing UFA's without significantly impacting the future - those are exactly the kind of trades every contending GM should be trying to make. I'm glad ours is. I've been very pleased to see the moves Chevy has been making via trades the last few seasons.. Very smart,wise moves that haven't backfired or turned out badly that I can see or so rarely as to be overshadowed by the good ones.. We have ourselves a good'er..
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110537 I think the only mistake I've seen Chevy make with trades is trading for Setoguchi. Been very happy with most of his deals.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110554 Solid trade again by Chevy. Deep roster. Probably done now tho. I'd imagine
March 2, 201510 yr Author comment_110556 Probably done now tho. I'd imagine Chevel dayoff Couple day offs this week with only 2 games.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110574 Klingberg sucked so getting anything for him was a solid move. People making a big deal out of Pardy at forward but really the 4th line plays 4 minutes. Say what you want but since Pardy has been dressed as a forward the pk has been much better and Pardy plays the PK as a d man.
March 2, 201510 yr comment_110581 I think the only mistake I've seen Chevy make with trades is trading for Setoguchi. Been very happy with most of his deals. And the Pavelec contract. Chevy must have been drunk when he negotiated that.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110584 I think the only mistake I've seen Chevy make with trades is trading for Setoguchi. Been very happy with most of his deals. And the Pavelec contract. Chevy must have been drunk when he negotiated that. I actually have no problem with Pavelec's contract. It might be a year longer then I'd like, but a cap hit of $3.9M is reasonable for a starting goalie, which is what he was when it was signed. And the Jets really had no other options when he was signed. They weren't going to trade for a starting goalie with where they were in their program, and there was still a chance / belief that Pavelec may turn into something more. We've got Pavelec under contract for 2 more years after this one. Hutchinson is signed for 1 more year after this one for 600k (575k cap hit). So it doesn't matter for next year. Even if you can't trade Pavelec over the next year, you can still manage that transition year as Hutch will still be an RFA. I believe because of Hutch's age, you won't be able to give him a bridge deal as I believe he will only have 1 year of RFA left before being a UFA, hence why Pavelec's contract might be one year too long. But, even if you can't dump Pavelec for a bag of pucks, you can still manage the two of them for that one year after Hutch gets a raise. It isn't at all an anchor of a contract like others out there. I still believe it was the right move at the time they signed Pavelec.
March 3, 201510 yr Author comment_110588 I think the only mistake I've seen Chevy make with trades is trading for Setoguchi. Been very happy with most of his deals. And the Pavelec contract. Chevy must have been drunk when he negotiated that. No but Pavelec was. If Pav had disclosed that DUI we would have signed him for less.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110594 Meh maybe. He had a lot of leverage. Was the team MVP, we had no other options etc. The dollars aren't bad.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110604 I 100% disagree. Pavelec has statistically been the worst "starting" goalie in the NHL since he signed that contract. There were many other options available like an AHL call up, or signing another teams backup in free agency to be our starter. All of those options would have cost less and would have resulted in better performance.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110605 Pavelec has statistically been the worst "starting" goalie in the NHL since he signed that contract. I'm no Pavelec defender but that's not even slightly accurate.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110606 I 100% disagree. Pavelec has statistically been the worst "starting" goalie in the NHL since he signed that contract. There were many other options available like an AHL call up, or signing another teams backup in free agency to be our starter. All of those options would have cost less and would have resulted in better performance. I agree Pavelec hasn't turned out, it doesn't mean it was a bad deal. I judge a "bad deal" based on what we gave up to get it and what the long term impact the contract has to the club. We gave up nothing to get Pavelec so no big deal there, he was already our property. Unlike Setoguchi where we gave up a 2nd round pick for a year of useless play. As for the long term impact of the deal, I don't think it has hurt the Jets either as I described in my original post. You could argue that using that money we gave Pavelec on a different player and paying an AHL goalie less might have helped the team (I'd still argue an AHL goalie starting would be worse then Pavelec), but at some point you still need to budget to pay a starting goalie a starting goalie salary, and the team really wasn't ready to really compete until this year anyway. We gave up nothing to sign him, he has a reasonable contract that doesn't hurt the club long term, and at the time that we signed him there was a good chance that he was going to actually turn into a good starting goalie. Things don't always work out, but his contract hasn't hurt the club.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110609 Pavelec has statistically been the worst "starting" goalie in the NHL since he signed that contract.I'm no Pavelec defender but that's not even slightly accurate.Actually yes it is.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110618 I think the only mistake I've seen Chevy make with trades is trading for Setoguchi. Been very happy with most of his deals. And the Pavelec contract. Chevy must have been drunk when he negotiated that. I actually have no problem with Pavelec's contract. It might be a year longer then I'd like, but a cap hit of $3.9M is reasonable for a starting goalie, which is what he was when it was signed. And the Jets really had no other options when he was signed. They weren't going to trade for a starting goalie with where they were in their program, and there was still a chance / belief that Pavelec may turn into something more. We've got Pavelec under contract for 2 more years after this one. Hutchinson is signed for 1 more year after this one for 600k (575k cap hit). So it doesn't matter for next year. Even if you can't trade Pavelec over the next year, you can still manage that transition year as Hutch will still be an RFA. I believe because of Hutch's age, you won't be able to give him a bridge deal as I believe he will only have 1 year of RFA left before being a UFA, hence why Pavelec's contract might be one year too long. But, even if you can't dump Pavelec for a bag of pucks, you can still manage the two of them for that one year after Hutch gets a raise. It isn't at all an anchor of a contract like others out there. I still believe it was the right move at the time they signed Pavelec. Within the long term plan the Pavelec contract makes sense. They had two potential starters in the pipeline but still a few years away. Pavelec was essentially the best player on the team at the time, and this team would have been in a bad way without him. Carolina is currently paying over 6 million to Ward and over 2 million to Khudobin this year, combining for around 8.5 million on just their goalies. Using almost any comparison to the other 29 teams, there is nothing about Pavelec's contract or the Jets goalie situation financially that is a problem. Unless you are filled with spite and insist the Jets have to trade Pavelec. While that might become feasible in the next year or two it is a terrible idea now, and not part of the Jets' plans.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110620 Pavelec has statistically been the worst "starting" goalie in the NHL since he signed that contract. I'm no Pavelec defender but that's not even slightly accurate.Actually yes it is.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110621 Pavelec has statistically been the worst "starting" goalie in the NHL since he signed that contract. I'm no Pavelec defender but that's not even slightly accurate.
March 3, 201510 yr comment_110625 Does anyone have stats to back up that claim? I wouldn't doubt if its true but it would be interesting to see the comparison
_4ce1be.png)
_4ccb55.png)
_b2ed7a.png)
Create an account or sign in to comment