Line combinations??

[JacketsDavid]

You're basically saying:

1. It should take a while to develop players.
2. It's too early to evaluate whether our crop of young players have been properly developed, because they haven't played enough NHL games.
3. CBJ still suck at developing players.

So, they're now going about it the right way, it's too early to determine whether or not it's had the results we want, but CBJ still suck at developing players. Is that right?

If you insist on using points/wins to evaluate our youth... are you intentionally ignoring the Calder Cup they just won, or did you actually forget?

So bottom line success in minor league hockey (Calder) leads to NHL success? Good luck proving that one.

Bottom line - you can't say we are "good/great" at developing players now. None of our elite players are developed internally (and I'm using elite at a CBJ level, not an actual NHL level). Bob we traded for. Jones we traded for. Wer'ski stayed in college, played some AHL playoff games then made the team here.

Again we hope our development is better than the past, but it's not proven. That's my point.

 

[JacketsDavid]

The Jackets need a difference maker that can carry them on offense. Wingers don't tend to carry forward play. Until the forwards get that player they can fall in behind, they'll be running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

Our success in our first season, and our owner and Prez/GM not being able to not tinker set us back.
Mr Mac (RIP) really thought this team could compete in years 2,3, etc. And he allowed Doug to make just enough moves to bring in enough grinders to never be the worst team in the league. They were so scared to lose, that it never allowed the franchise to do what it needed to do.
Their Commitment to Mediocrity really set us back. Now we should have been able to overcome that, but shows how many things are totally screwed up with this franchise.
Also a few times at the deadline they should have gutted the team, and they refused to do that. And those were the years where we would generally finish strong to screw up the draft position and give a glimmer of hope of keeping the team together.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

But the question is why Y would be a better choice than mister X? If that isn't ironed out in the selection process whether it is a question of selecting an individual draft pick or a head coach it is basically a question of relying on chance more than anything when it comes to these things.

This summer's draft should have cleared all talk of the 2016 Blue Jackets not knowing how to draft as they did not bite the bullet but jumped out of its way just in time. Picking head coaches should follow the same process: you dig out their playbook, character and whatever else it takes to complete that puzzle. How come there isn't a coach scouting department? Perhaps the most important piece of your on-ice product is taken out of the same upside down top hat where Krueger's name had casually been tossed in along with Tortorella's.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

But the question is why Y would be a better choice than mister X? If that isn't ironed out in the selection process whether it is a question of selecting an individual draft pick or a head coach it is basically a question of relying on chance more than anything when it comes to these things.

This summer's draft should have cleared all talk of the 2016 Blue Jackets not knowing how to draft as they did not bite the bullet but jumped out of its way just in time. Picking head coaches should follow the same process: you dig out their playbook, character and whatever else it takes to complete that puzzle. How come there isn't a coach scouting department? Perhaps the most important piece of your on-ice product is taken out of the same upside down top hat where Krueger's name had casually been tossed in along with Tortorella's.

More importantly: What kind of sausages do they like? Toppings?

 

[Viqsi]

Our success in our first season, and our owner and Prez/GM not being able to not tinker set us back.
Mr Mac (RIP) really thought this team could compete in years 2,3, etc. And he allowed Doug to make just enough moves to bring in enough grinders to never be the worst team in the league.

Or, in other words, you actually took Doug MacLean at his word when he spat on Mr. Mac's grave, insisting within a week of his death that no, really, it was all Mr. Mac's fault that MacLean kept ending up at the helm of some really crappy teams. After all, MacLean can't possibly be held responsible. He's a genius. He drafted Rick Nash, y'know.

I've been annoyed with you before, but now I'm downright disgusted.

* * *​

But the question is why Y would be a better choice than mister X? If that isn't ironed out in the selection process whether it is a question of selecting an individual draft pick or a head coach it is basically a question of relying on chance more than anything when it comes to these things.

This summer's draft should have cleared all talk of the 2016 Blue Jackets not knowing how to draft as they did not bite the bullet but jumped out of its way just in time. Picking head coaches should follow the same process: you dig out their playbook, character and whatever else it takes to complete that puzzle. How come there isn't a coach scouting department? Perhaps the most important piece of your on-ice product is taken out of the same upside down top hat where Krueger's name had casually been tossed in along with Tortorella's.

I'm going to go ahead and presume that this is your roundabout way of indicating that the Leaning One doesn't approve of Krueger.

 

[major major]

Meh. It's become clear that no matter how thoroughly and repeatedly it's debunked, people will still irrationally cling to "Someday Our Messiah Will Come" theories from now 'till the end of the world and perhaps beyond even that. They want to point at one player and say "THAT GUY" for absolutely everything, good or bad or otherwise, twenty-two other players be damned, and that's just that. I've got enough stress right now from political mishegaas without trying to tilt at that windmill.

Not just the messiah Viqsi, but the first overall messiah!

You see the ineffable taint would have ruined Jonathan Toews (or Bergeron or Kopitar, etc.....). He never would have become Toews here.

Nevermind that 6 of the last 7 Cups were won by top centers who were ranked at or below PLD's level when they were his age. Only an instant #1OA messiah will work.

 

[major major]

As for your argument that defensemen are the QB, that just doesn't make sense. Everything flows through the center and that's where puck distribution comes from. Yeah, the Jackets may claim that they are focusing on running play through their backend and distributing the puck from there, but that's neither true to what's actually happening nor is it particularly feasible.

Our pivot needs to be our distributor and playmaker. When we try to force our defensemen to do that on anything but the powerplay, the puck winds up on opponents' sticks more often than not and leads to being out-possessed and out-shot. Right now, our best QB isn't Werenski or Jones but it's Wennberg. He's the only player who actually opens up parts of the ice for our other players. The rest get pressured and turn the puck over (with Werenski being an exception but in his case the puck gets turned over right after he passes it away because our forwards aren't good enough to handle a 'hot pass' that isn't right on their tapes).

No, the defensemen are like cornerbacks. They patrol and control large parts of the ice. But to actually move the puck forward and sustain offense, that comes down to the center.

Cornerbacks? Okay, the football analogies should officially be banned. Everyone in hockey, besides the goalie, contributes greatly to what happens at both ends of the rink. There is no offensive team and no defensive team. Watch our D and how often the play flows through them. The outcome (the success or death of an entry) is largely determined by what happens at that juncture.

Depending on the system, centers can be more similar to wingers, or D can be kept in a more limited "chip it out" kind of role. The "new NHL" system that Torts is trying to push emphasizes the D more. They start most rushes and they have to be everywhere on the ice. If you're serious about the "new NHL" I don't think you should be demoting the role of D-men. There's something incongruous about that. I know you value the "leaguewide consensus", so you should know that around the league when people talk about what's different about the new NHL, they talk about the new role of defencemen.

The alternative is what we're seeing right now Viqsi. It's resulting in average players being paid above average salaries for below average results.

Really that's the only alternative you could think of? How about above average players? How about guys like Toews and Kopitar and Bergeron who develop? When you have high character players like that, you don't have to worry about "ineffable taint". Teams don't change them, they change teams.

 

[Viqsi]

Not just the messiah Viqsi, but the first overall messiah!

You see the ineffable taint would have ruined Jonathan Toews (or Bergeron or Kopitar, etc.....). He never would have become Toews here.

Nevermind that 6 of the last 7 Cups were won by top centers who were ranked at or below PLD's level when they were his age. Only an instant #1OA messiah will work.

Indeed. And never mind that we've picked first overall before...

I frankly suspect that 2002 simply ruined a lot of people. They saw that happen and now a part of them keeps thinking "hey, we've traded up before; we just did it in the wrong year. We should do that again, but in a year where we get a real superstar." Never mind that the lack of such was exactly why such a trade was possible to begin with...

 

[Crede777]

Indeed. And never mind that we've picked first overall before...

I frankly suspect that 2002 simply ruined a lot of people. They saw that happen and now a part of them keeps thinking "hey, we've traded up before; we just did it in the wrong year. We should do that again, but in a year where we get a real superstar." Never mind that the lack of such was exactly why such a trade was possible to begin with...

Trading up to draft Nash is hardly picking first.

And I'm not saying "hey maybe we could trade up." I'm saying there is literally no way to progress in this league until that happens so they need to figure it out.

Not that I know why I'm trying to convince anyone of this. The Jackets' results speak for themselves.

 

[JacketsDavid]

Or, in other words, you actually took Doug MacLean at his word when he spat on Mr. Mac's grave, insisting within a week of his death that no, really, it was all Mr. Mac's fault that MacLean kept ending up at the helm of some really crappy teams. After all, MacLean can't possibly be held responsible. He's a genius. He drafted Rick Nash, y'know.

I've been annoyed with you before, but now I'm downright disgusted.

What should have you disgusted then was Mr Mac saying that he would walk across the Scioto River if we didn't make the playoffs (on Doug's shoulders)...

So it was Mr. Mac himself promising the playoffs within the first 2 seasons. Then it took him 6 seasons for fire IDWT.

So sorry if facts make you disgusted.

PS - Go back and read my quote where is said Mr Mac "AND" IDWT. I didn't say Mr. Mac.

 

[Monk]

So bottom line success in minor league hockey (Calder) leads to NHL success? Good luck proving that one.

Bottom line - you can't say we are "good/great" at developing players now. None of our elite players are developed internally (and I'm using elite at a CBJ level, not an actual NHL level). Bob we traded for. Jones we traded for. Wer'ski stayed in college, played some AHL playoff games then made the team here.

Again we hope our development is better than the past, but it's not proven. That's my point.

I'm not necessarily arguing that it's good/great now (different poster), I'm arguing that it's better than it was. I think that it's obvious that it is.

Are you one of those binary types, where success = Stanley Cup and everything else = failure? I know we got a couple of them running around here.

 

[JacketsDavid]

I'm not necessarily arguing that it's good/great now (different poster), I'm arguing that it's better than it was. I think that it's obvious that it is.

Are you one of those binary types, where success = Stanley Cup and everything else = failure? I know we got a couple of them running around here.

I can buy that - what I'm arguing is saying our player development is good/great compared to other NHL franchises.

I'm binary when it comes to folks saying we're good/great at player development now. I'm looking for someone to show me how we're good/great (at the NHL level) at developing players.

 

[Monk]

I can buy that - what I'm arguing is saying our player development is good/great compared to other NHL franchises.

I'm binary when it comes to folks saying we're good/great at player development now. I'm looking for someone to show me how we're good/great (at the NHL level) at developing players.

Fair enough! I don't think there's (much) NHL evidence yet, but I think we're on the right track.

 

[CalBuckeyeRob]

If you have a lot of high draft choices and you are good at developing players, that should be reflected in more wins, which has yet to happen. Maybe they have picked fewer outright garbage players--which is improvement--but you have to compare the process to the league as a whole, not your own past ineptitude. It would be like a company boasting about improving on the job safety because they only had 5 people die on the job and it used to be 20. But if the industry average is 2 you still are not good at safety.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I can buy that - what I'm arguing is saying our player development is good/great compared to other NHL franchises.

I'm binary when it comes to folks saying we're good/great at player development now. I'm looking for someone to show me how we're good/great (at the NHL level) at developing players.

You mean developing players at the NHL level, or proof of good development that is now at the NHL level?

 

[Viqsi]

What should have you disgusted then was Mr Mac saying that he would walk across the Scioto River if we didn't make the playoffs (on Doug's shoulders)...

So it was Mr. Mac himself promising the playoffs within the first 2 seasons.

...i.e. he was listening to MacLean, just like everyone else was. Oops.

Then it took him 6 seasons for fire IDWT.

This is probably the only thing you can point to as a flaw on the part of Mr. Mac - being unwilling to kick people to the curb promptly. Which is normally a GOOD thing, unless you've got someone dangerously incompetent at the helm.

PS - Go back and read my quote where is said Mr Mac "AND" IDWT. I didn't say Mr. Mac.

Don't you even ****ing try that dodge. You absolutely did. Your exact words were "[Mr. Mac] allowed Doug to make just enough moves to bring in enough grinders to never be the worst team in the league." You bought directly into MacLean's ghoulish assertion that MacLean was somehow not allowed to do anything more, as opposed to the reality in which he was unwilling and/or unable because he was the one who insisted the team was awesome and only needed particular adjustments because of his "genius".

Ray Whitney was never expected to be a "grinder". Todd Marchant was supposed to take off and be a top center. Darryl Sydor was supposed to be a force on the blueline. Adam Foote and Sergei Fedorov were both supposed to be infusions of superstar talent. That's what MacLean always kept trying to sell, and everyone bought it and bought it and bought it until it was clear that he was an idiot and had conned us all.

Mr. Mac trusted him and took him at his word - just like so many Jackets fans did - and as a result MacLean tried to sell a disrespectful revisionist history of how he was somehow handcuffed - laying his own incompetence at the feet of the recently deceased - and you're defending that despicable nonsense.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

I'm going to go ahead and presume that this is your roundabout way of indicating that the Leaning One doesn't approve of Krueger.

The Leading One pointed out after Team USA's loss to Team Europa how Tortorella's men played vertical ice hockey and how Krueger's men used the device of control, puck, to their advantage.

In peanut's shell Leading One's message after the tournament was pointing out how Finland and Sweden adapted to NHL's boring and unimagitive hockey, creating two faceless teams without an identity, without results. Team Europe played unorthodox hockey in terms of pass directions and thrived.

You in comparison do not speak for or of Kruegerian ice hockey. I only hear the name Lex Luger, Lex Luger, Lex Luger... being repeated. If the basic line between vertical ice hockey and puck control cannot be drawn on the flip chart prior to any head coach being named, in speculation or appointment-wise, I do not see how your method of testing the odds beats current coaching appointments (Tortorella, Madden) of the Blue Jackets when neither has the required system of thought in place.

I don't see how can the team succesfully draft but not use the same techniques in hiring head coaches. They would just have to go beyond their current knowledge and educate themselves. How come there isn't a former (well educated) coach in the absolute top brass? Meanwhile NHL organizations hire Corsi-men like mushrooms in the rain to try and pull the potential rabbit out of the hat.

 

[major major]

If you have a lot of high draft choices and you are good at developing players, that should be reflected in more wins, which has yet to happen. Maybe they have picked fewer outright garbage players--which is improvement--but you have to compare the process to the league as a whole, not your own past ineptitude. It would be like a company boasting about improving on the job safety because they only had 5 people die on the job and it used to be 20. But if the industry average is 2 you still are not good at safety.

That's the thing - The oldest players Jarmo has drafted are now 21, and that's just one draft. The latest drafts are just teenagers. We're still years away from seeing these guys reach peak-form, so counting wins is a fools errand. And counting wins is a dumb way to evaluate drafts even for prime age players. You should really look at how the players develop relative to their draft peers.

Wennberg

OR

Pulock
Zadorov
Lazar
Mueller

Milano

OR

Sanheim
Tuch
DeAngelo
Schmaltz

Werenski

OR

Meier
Rantanen
Crouse
Gurianov


etc....

 

[JacketsDavid]

...i.e. he was listening to MacLean, just like everyone else was. Oops.



This is probably the only thing you can point to as a flaw on the part of Mr. Mac - being unwilling to kick people to the curb promptly. Which is normally a GOOD thing, unless you've got someone dangerously incompetent at the helm.



Don't you even ****ing try that dodge. You absolutely did. Your exact words were "[Mr. Mac] allowed Doug to make just enough moves to bring in enough grinders to never be the worst team in the league." You bought directly into MacLean's ghoulish assertion that MacLean was somehow not allowed to do anything more, as opposed to the reality in which he was unwilling and/or unable because he was the one who insisted the team was awesome and only needed particular adjustments because of his "genius".

Ray Whitney was never expected to be a "grinder". Todd Marchant was supposed to take off and be a top center. Darryl Sydor was supposed to be a force on the blueline. Adam Foote and Sergei Fedorov were both supposed to be infusions of superstar talent. That's what MacLean always kept trying to sell, and everyone bought it and bought it and bought it until it was clear that he was an idiot and had conned us all.

Mr. Mac trusted him and took him at his word - just like so many Jackets fans did - and as a result MacLean tried to sell a disrespectful revisionist history of how he was somehow handcuffed - laying his own incompetence at the feet of the recently deceased - and you're defending that despicable nonsense.

I stand by what I said. Mr. Mac thought we could win early on and let Doug do as he pleased to try to do that. So it's on Mr. Mac as well.

Todd Marchant - no one outside of IDWT (and likely a few of his followers on here) actually believed Marchant was a #1 center. Congrats for drinking the cool aid if you actually thought he was a #1C. Desperation move by IDWT to find a 1C.

I'm not a revisionist, I was against Doug pretty early on (EDM was the first guy against him and I wasn't far behind him in the other board) - as he revealed starting lines on his radio broadcast was a great example. To hearing the dummy blaming Whitney and Sillinger for our road woes. To telling Feds to stand down from criticizing Nash and Z. It was a huge crap show. It's a shame it took Mr. Mac so long to hire the right coach (Hitch) against IDWT's advisement, then to finally rid himself of IDWT. Maybe you can absolve ownership. I didn't/don't.

 

[JacketsDavid]

You mean developing players at the NHL level, or proof of good development that is now at the NHL level?

Developing players at NHL level.
Yes I get Jarmo has only been here 3 seasons but JD has been here 4, and philosophy (for development - not rushing) has been here a year or two before JD.

So I think 4-6 years is a decent measure of time. If all draftees were 18 it puts some in early-mid 20's.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Developing players at NHL level.
Yes I get Jarmo has only been here 3 seasons but JD has been here 4, and philosophy (for development - not rushing) has been here a year or two before JD.

So I think 4-6 years is a decent measure of time. If all draftees were 18 it puts some in early-mid 20's.

Again just for clarification. Isn't development best done prior to a player's arrival at the NHL level?

 

[Monk]

Again just for clarification. Isn't development best done prior to a player's arrival at the NHL level?

But... then there's no way to judge their progress.

Leadership is bad.

 

[Old Guy]

Mr. Mac thought we could win early on and let Doug do as he pleased to try to do that. So it's on Mr. Mac as well.

To me, this just feels like you are dancing on that man's grave. I know it's just you expressing you opinion, but ......

It's just.......ewwwwww.

And anyway....Doug's been gone about a decade. We know he drafted and developed terrible, and had an ego the size of King Kong, and wasn't that good at his job, and was a terrible talent judge, and a control freak.

At what point is it just time to let it go?

 

[KapG]

What's up with Jenner playing such little minutes after a great season last year???

 

[mikeyp24]

^He is just struggling mightily. Not everyone is hitting on all cylinders yet and honestly he has been our worst F imo. He will bounce back by the time we finish this western stretch. He is too good to drop off the earth. He gets A LOT of dirty area goals and we haven't shot enough and put guys there until this game. Put him at the.net with Werenski and he will find the net.