DONT TRADE Jackman!?

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

DONT TRADE Jackman!?

Postby Pens4Life on Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:51 pm

Why? He is a cheap right D-man,who still can help us in next seasons..
Play good offensive game,and we need 3. (Gonchar,Whitney)
He is better than Cross,Cairns,Odelein,Melichar,Scuderi...
Pens4Life
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 3,508
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:02 pm
Location: Slovenia

Postby Henry Hank on Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:56 pm

Jackman has value, but not to this team. We're already stuck with one offensive defenseman with little defensive ability in Gonchar. I'd suggest that Jackman is even worse defensively. Whitney is another offensively talented defenseman that's been weak on defense, but he should improve. The Pens don't need another one dimensional defenseman who can't play D. Jackman simply doesn't fit. Replace him with a legitimately good defensive defenseman and along with improvements from Whitney and Orpik I think you'll start to see some real improvement on the blueline. The current defense simply isn't working. It needs to be overhauled. Gonchar, Whitney, and Orpik definitely will be back next year. You keep Jackman and suddenly things aren't looking different at all. This team's problems start in the defensive end. Jackman doesn't contribute there and he's the most expendable. Take what you can get for him at the deadline and start looking for some real defensive help.
Henry Hank
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,480
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:31 pm

Dont Trade Jackman

Postby lassic27 on Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:00 pm

I agree.... He has been very dissapointing this season, but the few games in the month of February he did show some resemblance of the player from 03-04 season.I think his biggest problem is confidence. Edzo was on his back, then he was in Theriens doghouse. i say hold on to him the rest of season and see how he plays then evaluate his status in the summer.
lassic27
 

Postby KG on Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:18 pm

It all depends on what the market is for Jackman. His value should be decent being that he is still young and a booming shot. Therefore, the pens should not give him away (4th round pick say). I would move him for more of a defensive guy no question. Those guys are hard to come buy come deadline time though. Maybe Willie Mitchell. Huge D man, from the Devils system, now with Lemaire. Relatively young.
KG
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 11,979
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:53 am
Location: NY

Re: DONT TRADE Jackman!?

Postby NIN on Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:15 pm

ziggystardust wrote:
Pens4Life wrote:Why? He is a cheap right D-man,who still can help us in next seasons..
Play good offensive game,and we need 3. (Gonchar,Whitney)
He is better than Cross,Cairns,Odelein,Melichar,Scuderi...


I would trade him for a 7th round pick.
He's horrific.


They dont have a 7th round anymore, it only goes down to 6th.

Jackman will stay, the Pens will work with him closely over the summer if they are smart. He is not too far along to improve slightly (any improvement would be significant) in the defesneive zone. They should hire Rod Langway to put him through a 1 month clinic. If he plays this bad next season he wont be a Penguins for 10 games into the season.
NIN
 

Re: DONT TRADE Jackman!?

Postby Spiral Architect on Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:06 pm

NIN wrote:They dont have a 7th round anymore, it only goes down to 6th.
No, it's seven rounds now. They drafted Joe Vitale with last year's seventh rounder.
Spiral Architect
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: Vermont

Re: DONT TRADE Jackman!?

Postby NIN on Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:19 pm

Spiral Architect wrote:
NIN wrote:They dont have a 7th round anymore, it only goes down to 6th.
No, it's seven rounds now. They drafted Joe Vitale with last year's seventh rounder.


I was so sure it went from 12 to 6 I looked it up. Your right, thanks for the news flash. Im sure ZS will revise his statement and make it an 8th rounder now. I think they could get at least a 3rd rounder for Jackman.
NIN
 

Postby jmh70 on Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:54 pm

No reason to trade Jackman unless the Pens are trying to get rid of all their bad defensemen (which would be quite an accomplishment).
jmh70
 

Postby netwolf on Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:58 pm

Jackman can be effective as a bottom-pairing guy that gets the majority of his minutes on the left point of the power play. Besides, you aren't going to get anything of value for him. If kept and used in a role that suites him, he can be productive.
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,378
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby Henry Hank on Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:04 pm

But that IS the role in which Jackman's been used. As far as the defensemen we currently have go, he's fifth in ice time per game behind Gonchar, Whitney, Scuderi, and Orpik. He plays the least amount of even strength time as those guys. He's STILL been a liability. He's not a bad power play guy, but then again, the power play was doing well under Therrien with him sitting a lot. I don't see how Jackman makes us any better. Replacing him with a good defensive defenseman would help make this a better team.
Henry Hank
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,480
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:31 pm

Postby netwolf on Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:15 pm

I would have to research it to be sure, but I think Jackman's ice time per game is skewed by him dressing as a 7th defenseman and getting next to no minutes, which as happened often.

I'm not saying the Jackman isn't an adventure in his own end, but what defenseman is on the Pens roster that hasn't been a liability more often than not. My pro-Jackman stance has never been that he isn't bad defensively, it's that he at least does something to compensate for it in the way of PP production. When he first got sat down earlier in the year he was a point a game guy. I seriously doubt he'd have kept that up over a full year, but he was producing.

Right now, he probably has the best point shot on the team. When playing well, he also has a bit of an edge.

If someone wants to offer up something of value, then fine. Make the move. I just don't see the point in moving him for the mid-to-late round pick, has been, or never was type of return he'd likely net.
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,378
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby Henry Hank on Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:19 pm

Here's my reasoning, and I'm not just isolating Jackman. If the Pens want to be a championship calibre team, they can't be relying heavily on the likes of Jackman, Melichar, Scuderi, etc. Whitney and Orpik seem like they could develop into the type of guys we need. Welch holds promise, and we're stuck with Gonchar for better or worse. I just don't like sticking with the status quo. This defense is BAD. In my opinion, the best course of action is to get rid of as much of the junk as possible (the guys I mentioned previously) and get some legit players. Maybe Jackman isn't so bad compared to some of the others, but being a little better than some other bad players doesn't say much. If we can only get a draft pick, fine. We're not going to get what we need by trading a Jackman or Melichar or LeClair anyway. Clear their spot and their salary and bring someone in that better fits the team's needs.
Henry Hank
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,480
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:31 pm

Postby NIN on Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:27 pm

The bottom line is that Jackman wants to pad his stats so he can win big in arbitration like Tarnstrom did. No arb. judge is going to listen to the Penguins complain about Jackmans defense when he is only -11 as compared to the defensive brilliance of one Jozef Melichar (-7).

Conversly the Penguins would'nt mind keeping Jackman if he would become serious about helping the team in his own end. That would require about a 150 from where he is now (he has picked up the habbit of at least TRYING to check forwards) and I would be shocked if he did. At 27 he is not a lost cause and trading him could be a mistake. I would give him the rest of this season and the summer and training camp and 10 games into next season at the most to prove he can be compident in the D-zone and at times take charge.

Unless of course a great offer comes along, like Reasoner or Umberger.
NIN
 

Postby pfim on Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:43 pm

I'm not saying the Jackman isn't an adventure in his own end, but what defenseman is on the Pens roster that hasn't been a liability more often than not. My pro-Jackman stance has never been that he isn't bad defensively, it's that he at least does something to compensate for it in the way of PP production. When he first got sat down earlier in the year he was a point a game guy. I seriously doubt he'd have kept that up over a full year, but he was producing.


I don't think he does enough to compensate for his defensive "prowess." And that's saying something considering his point production.

He won't be on this team when it is any good.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Postby MrKnowNothing on Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:16 pm

pfim wrote:
I'm not saying the Jackman isn't an adventure in his own end, but what defenseman is on the Pens roster that hasn't been a liability more often than not. My pro-Jackman stance has never been that he isn't bad defensively, it's that he at least does something to compensate for it in the way of PP production. When he first got sat down earlier in the year he was a point a game guy. I seriously doubt he'd have kept that up over a full year, but he was producing.


I don't think he does enough to compensate for his defensive "prowess." And that's saying something considering his point production.

He won't be on this team when it is any good.


Exactly.

We need to worry about getting rid of the Jackman's on this team right now, not who we should keep around because they might be ok bottom pairing guys.

Solid bottom pairing guys are a dime a dozen around the league. Witness the Pens who are pretty much employing a whole defense of them.

They need to clear out the quantity and bring in some quality.
MrKnowNothing
 

Postby NIN on Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:28 pm

MrKnowNothing wrote:
pfim wrote:
I'm not saying the Jackman isn't an adventure in his own end, but what defenseman is on the Pens roster that hasn't been a liability more often than not. My pro-Jackman stance has never been that he isn't bad defensively, it's that he at least does something to compensate for it in the way of PP production. When he first got sat down earlier in the year he was a point a game guy. I seriously doubt he'd have kept that up over a full year, but he was producing.


I don't think he does enough to compensate for his defensive "prowess." And that's saying something considering his point production.

He won't be on this team when it is any good.


Exactly.

We need to worry about getting rid of the Jackman's on this team right now, not who we should keep around because they might be ok bottom pairing guys.

Solid bottom pairing guys are a dime a dozen around the league. Witness the Pens who are pretty much employing a whole defense of them.

They need to clear out the quantity and bring in some quality.


Yeah but who is going to take two 86' Pontiac Bonnevilles and give you a 2005 Ford Mustang.
NIN
 


Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


e-mail