Around the NHL 10 - 2022/23

[tbcwpg]

No i mean he was brought in to fix the room... bowness prob asked chevy due to their history

He might have asked Chevy to bring him in due to familiarity for a playoff run but to make a claim that Vladislav Namestnikov was brought in to fix the room is a big stretch to me.

 

[surixon]

He might have asked Chevy to bring him in due to familiarity for a playoff run but to make a claim that Vladislav Namestnikov was brought in to fix the room is a big stretch to me.

No idea why people think the room needs to be fixed. It seems Bones did that early in the year. The Jets issues seem more on ice execution with some poor percentages thrown in then issues with an imploding room.

Teams slump and players get frustrated when that happens. That is the norm in highly competitive team sports.

 

[BigZ65]

I was hoping for Cliff Fletcher as interim.

 

[trebendan]

Off-season trade proposal: Comrie for Campbell

 

[SUX2BU]

I was hoping for Cliff Fletcher as interim.

why? all you need is an app

 

[DRW204]

Chuck Fletcher gone?? One less idiot GM for the NHL to trade with. Sad we couldn't take advantage of this dunce.

 

[WolfHouse]

No idea why people think the room needs to be fixed. It seems Bones did that early in the year. The Jets issues seem more on ice execution with some poor percentages thrown in then issues with an imploding room.

Teams slump and players get frustrated when that happens. That is the norm in highly competitive team sports.

Its two or maybe three years now that this team just stops listening to their coach and falls apart... theres something off in that room for sure

 

[KingBogo]

The question is: just how procactive has Chevy been? We hear rumors about what he's tried but since this org is so tight lipped I don't think we really know.

I wish we could run a simulation based off of what Chevy has tried to do over the years, and if trades would have happened simply off of fair market value with no player interference.

Since Toronto was brought up in a comparison to Winnipeg I looked them compared to the Jets, in how the roster was constructed. This includes everyone on the current roster and injured list. IMO this a decent way to gage how active a GM is in obtaining players.

Winnipeg

Trades 10
Draft 10
Signed 5
Waiver Claims 2

Toronto

Trades 11
Draft 6
Signed 9
Signed Waiver Claims 0

Trading approx the same, Jets have more drafted players, Toronto more signed players, but more interesting their signed players are much more important to the team, while all ours are deep depth players. Biggest difference IMO is not trading, but rather having players want to sign with you when they have other options.

 

[DRW204]

vladislav namestnikov, noted HR professional & room whisperer.

 

[gojetsgo]

vladislav namestnikov, noted HR professional & room whisperer.

something clearly happened in montreal where the team decided to stop listening to the coach so they traded for namestinikov to play the matt hendricks role

 

[surixon]

Its two or maybe three years now that this team just stops listening to their coach and falls apart... theres something off in that room for sure

We knew there was last year with all the public airing of dirty laundry. This year the tone from the players is much different. It's all about working through this and getting back to playing good hockey. That to me seems like a group pulling together. After a string of bad games they are back to playing the way the coach wants them to. I don't see it the same way this year. I see it as a team started deviating when pucks stopped going in the net for them and had to be reeled back in.

 

[DRW204]

something clearly happened in montreal where the team decided to stop listening to the coach so they traded for namestinikov to play the matt hendricks role

I saw his resume. Chartered HR Professional. This guy is here to fix problems.

 

[gojetsgo]

We knew there was last year with all the public airing of dirty laundry. This year the tone from the players is much different. It's all about working through this and getting back to playing good hockey. That to me seems like a group pulling together. After a string of bad games they are back to playing the way the coach wants them to. I don't see it the same way this year. I see it as a team started deviating when pucks stopped going in the net for them and had to be reeled back in.

pretty much top 6 scoring dried up and the bottom six scoring was non-existent so guys started cheating a bit for offense, had we been able to finish on more of our chances during this down stretch nobody would be claiming they stopped listening to the coach

 

[BoneDocUK]

I agree for the most part. I like his patience, I like what he looks for in the draft. The only thing I don't really like is the overall on ice template. I think we lag behind other orgs in that regard.

Agree.

Would add that "creative" and "reckless" are not equivalent. Chevy and the org have plenty of room to add some creativity in terms of how the team is structured, directed and improved on ice especially, without becoming TO / Philly, etc.

The Canes have been a better team than the Jets for a while now, and operate with some of the same constraints.

I think a significant issue with this team has been the seeming mismatch between drafting and roster-building and overall team tactics. If you draft for BPA then it's on you to work to develop those BPA players and find spots for them on your roster, even if it means getting coaching staffs to reevaluate their own preferences / biases.

It also means being proactive and not reactive when it comes to asses management -- moving out expiring contracts to make room for prospects on ELCs, rather than refusing to retain salary or entertain buyouts of a player like Wheeler or Schmidt, for example.

The Jets are viewed as a very conservative org. I suspect that identity is useful and also harmful at times.

 

[LowLefty]

We knew there was last year with all the public airing of dirty laundry. This year the tone from the players is much different. It's all about working through this and getting back to playing good hockey.

Last year was "blame the coach year" - this year they really don't have that option.
I'd expect the tone to change somewhat when you have no one to blame but yourselves.
However, there is always another option (aside from the players themselves) - puck luck is now creeping into the players / coach dialogue.

I don't see a problem with the room - but there might be a problem with the players and how they react to adversity.
We are likely heading in the right direction though (I'll assume that for now) - but I get nervous when comments start swinging to puck luck as the culprit.
And that excuse (reason) has a shelf life so hopefully everything is just fine and we start scoring.

 

[surixon]

Last year was "blame the coach year" - this year they really don't have that option.
I'd expect the tone to change somewhat when you have no one to blame but yourselves.
However, there is always another option (aside from the players themselves) - puck luck is now creeping into the players / coach dialogue.

I don't see a problem with the room - but there might be a problem with the players and how they react to adversity.
We are likely heading in the right direction though (I'll assume that for now) - but I get nervous when comments start swinging to puck luck as the culprit.
And that excuse (reason) has a shelf life so hopefully everything is just fine and we start scoring.

Yes I would agree that this group as a collective haven't handled adversity that well over the last number of years. They seem incapable of quickly pulling themselves out of big skids.

 

[LowLefty]

Yes I would agree that this group as a collective haven't handled adversity that well over the last number of years. They seem incapable of quickly pulling themselves out of big skids.

No they haven't -
And what is interesting and more to the point of my post, is that the team looks very much like they did when they had apparent coaching issues.
That leaves all of this wide open to speculation as to what the real issue(s) is - coaching, the room, the players ability to execute, a combination of all the above?

Here's what I think we know now:
It's not the room - neither the players or coach have lead us to believe that is the issue. There's no bickering from the players and the coach has said the opposite.
It's not the coach - the players have stated they believe in the systems and the message - and - the success in the first half of the season would lead you to believe it was the right message / system / game plan.
So what's left?

I land on the players - that's the common denominator from where I sit. And Helle's inability to save them in recent games, leaves the same impression.
The elephant in the room always seems to be the players and understandably so - it's the hardest issue to fix when you have the coach and the room as the low hanging fruit. But when you string enough years together with the same symptoms, it's gets harder to ignore.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

No they haven't -
And what is interesting and more to the point of my post, is that the team looks very much like they did when they had apparent coaching issues.
That leaves all of this wide open to speculation as to what the real issue(s) is - coaching, the room, the players ability to execute, a combination of all the above?

Here's what I think we know now:
It's not the room - neither the players or coach have lead us to believe that is the issue. There's no bickering from the players and the coach has said the opposite.
It's not the coach - the players have stated they believe in the systems and the message - and - the success in the first half of the season would lead you to believe it was the right message / system / game plan.
So what's left?

I land on the players - that's the common denominator from where I sit. And Helle's inability to save them in recent games, leaves the same impression.
The elephant in the room always seems to be the players and understandably so - it's the hardest issue to fix when you have the coach and the room as the low hanging fruit. But when you string enough years together with the same symptoms, it's gets harder to ignore.

We just drastically outshot 2 of our last opponents and generally out played them easily. Last years team would have been quite the opposite.

 

[LowLefty]

We just drastically outshot 2 of our last opponents and generally out played them easily. Last years team would have been quite the opposite.

I'm not prepared to lean on two game (that we lost) because we were better.
We should have killed Minnie based on how they played (horrible) and the B2B, with a goaltender that left so many rebounds that I lost count (and that we didn't seem to interested in jumping on), and our perimeter game that leads to a lot of shots.

I hope they are in fact moving in the right direction - and it'll be on the players to prove that this is all a puck luck issue.
I'm looking for more net front drive, clean execution that leads to goals, a little more grit in their game, especially along the walls, in front, and in our end, and I want to see them want it bad enough to run over teams like Minnie on a B2B and AHL SJS - that'll prove me wrong and I'd be happy if they did.

 

[WolfHouse]

We knew there was last year with all the public airing of dirty laundry. This year the tone from the players is much different. It's all about working through this and getting back to playing good hockey. That to me seems like a group pulling together. After a string of bad games they are back to playing the way the coach wants them to. I don't see it the same way this year. I see it as a team started deviating when pucks stopped going in the net for them and had to be reeled back in.

Possible but actions speak louder than words... and you can almost map the trajectory of this season based on last year

 

[surixon]

Possible but actions speak louder than words... and you can almost map the trajectory of this season based on last year

Sure if you look at one indicator in terms of wins and losses.

Other indicators actually show the team has gotten better as the year has gone along but have been hit with a significant down turn in finish.

Maybe I'll make some graphs tonight.

No they haven't -
And what is interesting and more to the point of my post, is that the team looks very much like they did when they had apparent coaching issues.
That leaves all of this wide open to speculation as to what the real issue(s) is - coaching, the room, the players ability to execute, a combination of all the above?

Here's what I think we know now:
It's not the room - neither the players or coach have lead us to believe that is the issue. There's no bickering from the players and the coach has said the opposite.
It's not the coach - the players have stated they believe in the systems and the message - and - the success in the first half of the season would lead you to believe it was the right message / system / game plan.
So what's left?

I land on the players - that's the common denominator from where I sit. And Helle's inability to save them in recent games, leaves the same impression.
The elephant in the room always seems to be the players and understandably so - it's the hardest issue to fix when you have the coach and the room as the low hanging fruit. But when you string enough years together with the same symptoms, it's gets harder to ignore.

I think it's pretty obvious that we don't have players who naturally fit the structure that the team wants to run.

We want to play a heavy forecheck game based more on chip and chase hockey. Does that template really fit the likes of Ehlers, Conner, Scheifele etc up front. You have a dichotomy between a group that wants to play more modern and offensive hockey and a coach who wants the to play more hard nosed old school hockey. Is it all that surprising that at times they deviate from a system that is likely not natural for them to play?

 

[voyageur]

something clearly happened in montreal where the team decided to stop listening to the coach so they traded for namestinikov to play the matt hendricks role

I just wonder how much that PLD foundation, that he took over for Lecavalier in Montreal, had an affect on the team. Mid season, and he is basically starting something in a city that he was rumoured to go to in the offseason. Scheifele runs similar events, in Winnipeg. I just wonder if that threw off any dynamic, where the team kind of recognized he was getting ready to leave. And his play afterwards certainly has given no indication that he plans to stay, or cares about the team.

It's all speculation.

The fact that Bones has coached Namestnikov twice, I think it makes it a lot easier to have a guy who understands your mindset, and your systems, than just fishing for a guy who may or may not have an impact. The Jets clearly needed some centre depth, looking at what Cs went for at the deadline (take Lars Eller or Bjustad as a comparison) the Jets invested minimal currency.

Both of the Jets acquisitions have contributed since arriving. It's the rest of the team that is still struggling to get out of their funk. Finding the right defensive combinations has been a struggle this year. Usually one player breaking down has resulted in lineup changes there, and that continues to happen.

The PP though, that's points they are leaving on the board, by not getting anything done, and that's probably the biggest priority down the stretch.

 

[surixon]

I just wonder how much that PLD foundation, that he took over for Lecavalier in Montreal, had an affect on the team. Mid season, and he is basically starting something in a city that he was rumoured to go to in the offseason. Scheifele runs similar events, in Winnipeg. I just wonder if that threw off any dynamic, where the team kind of recognized he was getting ready to leave. And his play afterwards certainly has given no indication that he plans to stay, or cares about the team.

It's all speculation.

The fact that Bones has coached Namestnikov twice, I think it makes it a lot easier to have a guy who understands your mindset, and your systems, than just fishing for a guy who may or may not have an impact. The Jets clearly needed some centre depth, looking at what Cs went for at the deadline (take Lars Eller or Bjustad as a comparison) the Jets invested minimal currency.

Both of the Jets acquisitions have contributed since arriving. It's the rest of the team that is still struggling to get out of their funk. Finding the right defensive combinations has been a struggle this year. Usually one player breaking down has resulted in lineup changes there, and that continues to happen.

The PP though, that's points they are leaving on the board, by not getting anything done, and that's probably the biggest priority down the stretch.

I have a hard time seeing how that would effect things. Morrissey is inolved in charities in both Winnipeg and Calgary. I'm sure many other players are similar in that regard.

 

[gojetsgo]

I have a hard time seeing how that would effect things. Morrissey is inolved in charities in both Winnipeg and Calgary. I'm sure many other players are similar in that regard.

clearly we started shooting 5% because pld took over a foundation

 

[voyageur]

I have a hard time seeing how that would effect things. Morrissey is inolved in charities in both Winnipeg and Calgary. I'm sure many other players are similar in that regard.

It's the timing part. That seems like an offseason move. Not in the middle of a road trip. Kypreos speculated that was the icing on the cake that he was leaving the Jets. Not sure if Lecavalier on any Montreal personnel were at the event, but it doesn't seem that any Jets were there, you know.

In the meantime since that foundation he has 4g, 2a, -9 (17 games), and that almost looks exactly like the slump he went into last year down the stretch.