Confirmed with Link: CBJ hire Don Waddell as President of Hockey Operations and General Manager. JD to serve as Senior Advisor
- Thread starter CBJWerenski8
- Start date
I guess this is a too complicated and foreign concept for most fans, but it's possible to think simultaneously that:
- nepotism is wrong
- nepotism seems to exist within the org
- Nash seems to be a beneficiary of it and has achieved his current role at least partially for wrong reasons
- Nash might be good at what he does and will be given a chance to show it
- nepotism is wrong
- nepotism seems to exist within the org
- Nash seems to be a beneficiary of it and has achieved his current role at least partially for wrong reasons
- Nash might be good at what he does and will be given a chance to show it
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
The definition of nepotism inherently implies lack of fitness for the job. That's why it is considered bad. Trying to say both is effectively trying to say "he's not fit for the job, but he might be fit for the job". It's self-contradictory.
According to which definition?
Nepotism - Wikipedia
It seems to me that nepotism for you means: "The act of granting an advantage, privilege, or position to relatives or friends in an occupation or field" while knowing they're not fit for the job.
How I understand it: "The act of granting an advantage, privilege, or position to relatives or friends in an occupation or field" with or without knowing how fit they are for the job.
Last edited:
I'm not very confident in Nash as an exec but I'm not sure this is nepotism, even by your definition which allows that he might be good at his job.
He's spent more time working his way up from the bottom than the former player GMs that I'm familiar with. Guys like Sakic and Yzerman went straight to the top group of execs - meanwhile we had Nash getting coffees and helping B prospects for a couple years and he's still not at the top. I couldn't tell you how Briere, Conroy, or Guerin started in FOs. I know Staios is literally the owners friend.
Should we just have a rule against hiring former star players? That would have kept the Avs from hiring Sakic.
Nowhere in my posts have I suggested anything like that even implicitly.
Probably all of those guys you used as examples have had some sort of personal relationship with the people that had decided to hire them, and that pre-existing relationship has had an impact on the hire, which is wrong or at least very questionable.
It's possible that every front office member of every NHL team have been initially hired/promoted partially for wrong nepotism-like reasons, and therefore one might think it's useless trying to point out that "Jackets are doing it wrong!" because everyone's doing it. That's a valid point, but what I would disagree with is the assumption that there is always an equal amount of "right" and "wrong" reasons behind every single FO and team staff hire in NHL history.
I believe most hires have been done mostly for the right reasons (which is still partially, not completely), and I also believe that the ratio of right and wrong reasons for a hire do vary depending on the team and the hired person.
koteka
Registered User
I 100% agree with #3 and have no choice but to accept #4.
All I want is to compete for a Cup. We have never come close to doing that. To me hiring and promoting ex Jackets is part of the same failing pattern we have been in for several years. Maybe Nash is the right guy for the job. That would be fantastic.
I think a signal is being sent that Nash is the heir apparent. I believe this is not good. If a really good up-and-coming junior executive is deciding between two potential jobs - one with an aging exec with no heir apparent and the Blue Jackets - I think he takes the other job (all other things equal) because we have this guy in the organization who is all but guaranteed the first look for any promotion.
Anyway, good luck high ranking hockey executive Rick Nash. I hope you don’t disappoint me like unbelievably skilled hockey player Rick Nash ultimately did.
I’m not great at math, but, even at 2.5 years per coach we’re looking at 10 years.
Again, along with the Laine/Merzlikins and the group of vets situation, we have the extremely UNIQUE situation of our coach “retiring”, only to come back a year later to coach a different team. Still don’t understand why this isn’t talked about more. Was his “voice” shared by the players in the “cut out the cancer” meeting??
To say the CBJ coaching situation of recent years is anywhere near “the norm”, is ridiculous. To use WHATEVER happened with Tortorella, to attempt to normalize things even more, is possibly the only thing more ridiculous.
We still have essentially zero idea about what ACTUALLY happened with Babcock. He looked at people’s phones, big f***ing whoop. Reality is that whatever he saw IN the phone(s) in probably worse than his actions of looking at said phones. Literally did the shit he was probably asked and tasked to do. Then everyone joined the groupthink crowd and called for his head. Should have kept him around.
This team would be BEST off with Torts as its GM, and Babcock as coach. If you ACTUALLY wanted to win a Stanley Cup.
What do you consider a team that can beat ANY of the teams on ANY night, that you would consider “competing for the cup”??
Because that’s what the CBJ team was for about 4 years, about 4 years ago.
koteka
Registered User
When we can have a few seasons where we get to the 2nd or 3rd round of the playoffs and teams are afraid to play us in the playoffs, then I will think we are serious Cup competitors. At our best, teams like Pittsburgh, Boston, and Washington didn’t fear us in the playoffs.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
JacketFanInFL
Brick by Brick
Genuinely do not get the hype for Nash in the front office. Trade request aside when he was a player, what parts of the organization have measurably gotten better under his direction?
And didn’t he support Babcock?
Using supporting Babcock as a negative is so far beyond stupid. Doesn't anyone form their own opinion of a person based on their own experience? Or I guess the new day thing is just follow the crowd and throw your own experiences out the door.
Also using his on ice play to predict the quality he would provide a FO is... I don't even know anymore
Also using his on ice play to predict the quality he would provide a FO is... I don't even know anymore
