The Jarmo Report (card)

[Xoggz22]

people bet on the prior year finish plus the acquisitions (Saad) to play well and assumed if the team was healthy they would play well. They didn't. Bob has regressed badly when healthy and is oft injured. The defense as you said has potential and likely will be better because we have a coach that stresses defensive responsibility more, but there is a lot of youth. Seth Jones was a -11 in half a season with the CBJ so yes he played a lot of minutes, but he gave up a lot of goals. Throw in another rookie in Werenerski and you have a lot of youth that needs time. So last year we stunk defensively, not sure how you think they are much better this season (only logical thing is coaching but coach was in place for 74 games). Goaltending is a major question with Bob - but his production and ability to stay on the ice.

Bottom line is a lot of us (I picked us to slip into the playoffs last year, not sure how many projected us to be atop 4 team in East) got fooled based upon a strong finish and what looked like an improved roster. Maybe what we still have is a dysfunctional team? A team that starts slow and usually are out of it by new Years.

Why I think the D will be better:

1) A full camp with the coaching staff in place to implement a structure in pre-season, not the regular season.
2) Murray and Jones played big minutes for the first time in their career and should be expected to improve their ability to handle that this year
3) The hiring of Shaw to work with the defense
4) Tyutin is not only not in the top 4 but not on the team
5) This will be one of the most mobile defensive units in the league
6) Werenski will not be playing big minutes until he earns more time.

Again, may be a pipe dream but I refuse to believe the D will be as bad as last year. The simple fact that JJ won't need to play against top lines night in and night out is very big in my book. I think he'll be a very, very good 2nd pair d-man. And we haven't been able to say that since he came to the CBJ

 

[Jackets16]

It really is simple (most/all of these points have already been posted).

• Better coaching (MUCH better coaching if you ask me)
• Murray and Jones are the best top pairing we have ever had and they will continue to improve
• Johnson and Savard might be the best second pairing we have ever had
• Werenski is better than Tyutin

 

[Crede777]

It really is simple (most/all of these points have already been posted).

• Better coaching (MUCH better coaching if you ask me)
• Murray and Jones are the best top pairing we have ever had and they will continue to improve
• Johnson and Savard might be the best second pairing we have ever had
• Werenski is better than Tyutin

What about the concern that the Blues/Boston method of constructing a team (defense first, physical play, score by committee) is no longer a valid approach? That now teams need to be high speed, offensive, puck possession teams lead by a couple of franchise players like Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Washington?

 

[Monk]

What about the concern that the Blues/Boston method of constructing a team (defense first, physical play, score by committee) is no longer a valid approach? That now teams need to be high speed, offensive, puck possession teams lead by a couple of franchise players like Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Washington?

Didn't the Penguins just win the cup with a score-by-committee approach?

 

[Crede777]

Didn't the Penguins just win the cup with a score-by-committee approach?

There is a difference between what successful playoff teams do (everyone has to contribute) and a score by committee approach.

The Pens are absolutely led by two of the best forwards in the game. Also they received a boost from a star winger in Kessel.

Columbus has good depth, but I'm worried the lack of a world class forward will hold us back.

 

[Monk]

There is a difference between what successful playoff teams do (everyone has to contribute) and a score by committee approach.

The Pens are absolutely led by two of the best forwards in the game. Also they received a boost from a star winger in Kessel.

Columbus has good depth, but I'm worried the lack of a world class forward will hold us back.

That's fair. I guess we'll just have to keep our fingers crossed for Saad, Bjorkstrand, PLD, etc to become those star forwards.

 

[JacketsDavid]

It really is simple (most/all of these points have already been posted).

• Better coaching (MUCH better coaching if you ask me)
• Murray and Jones are the best top pairing we have ever had and they will continue to improve
• Johnson and Savard might be the best second pairing we have ever had
• Werenski is better than Tyutin

-Totally disagree that 2016-17 Werenerski will be better than 2016-17 Tyutin. 2018-19 certainly, likely even 2017-18 but he's never played a minute in the NHL.

 

[Monk]

-Totally disagree that 2016-17 Werenerski will be better than 2016-17 Tyutin. 2018-19 certainly, likely even 2017-18 but he's never played a minute in the NHL.

I mean... it's very, very likely that he's better than 2015-2016 Tyutin, so...

 

[Crede777]

-Totally disagree that 2016-17 Werenerski will be better than 2016-17 Tyutin. 2018-19 certainly, likely even 2017-18 but he's never played a minute in the NHL.

If Werenski isn't ready for the NHL, then we will have Goloubef/Prout who are better than 2015-16 Tyutin. They aren't great, but Tyutin was unworkable.

 

[JacketsDavid]

If Werenski isn't ready for the NHL, then we will have Goloubef/Prout who are better than 2015-16 Tyutin. They aren't great, but Tyutin was unworkable.

So why did Tyutin play 17:35 per game last season and the better Prout only played 16:10/game and Goloubef played a whopping 15:08/game? Additionally Prout and Tyutin both ended up as -6 and Golo was -3.

Was the coaching staff trying to lose or you think you're a better evaluator of NHL talent than Torts and his staff?

Really curious to how you think they are better but played less?

Guessing it's the "I overestimate our players" and "he's gone so he sucked". Maybe all 3 suck. But Tyutin was largely let go because of his contract and the other guys are back because they are cheaper, not better.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Bottom line is a lot of us (I picked us to slip into the playoffs last year, not sure how many projected us to be atop 4 team in East) got fooled based upon a strong finish and what looked like an improved roster. Maybe what we still have is a dysfunctional team? A team that starts slow and usually are out of it by new Years.

Bottom line is "a lot of us" (and by that I mean, even if you didn't, everyone) don't know what the hell we're talking about. Even the most reasoned, supportable by evidence or even expert position is impacted by the unavoidable fact that the games are played by people, who get hurt, have bad days, make unexpected improvements, get good news from home, get advice from siblings, feel sluggish, have a really good workout, etc.

This is not to say that optimistic vs. pessimistic (no people, the opposite of optimistic isn't "realistic") isn't a discussion worth having, nor that we can't learn things from such discussion, ONly that this is why I'm rarely either optimistic or pessimistic. I am glad when the team is doing well, and bummed when it isn't, and to a greater degree depending on how well or poorly. It's why my avatar continues to be a bunny with a pancake on its head.

 

[JacketsDavid]

I mean... it's very, very likely that he's better than 2015-2016 Tyutin, so...

How much are we betting and how do we measure better?

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

How much are we betting and how do we measure better?

One...million....dollars.

And probably "differently."

 

[Jackets16]

What about the concern that the Blues/Boston method of constructing a team (defense first, physical play, score by committee) is no longer a valid approach? That now teams need to be high speed, offensive, puck possession teams lead by a couple of franchise players like Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Washington?

I don't believe that for one. One thing works in a sport and then everyone copies it. Then, a few years later, some team does something else that works. Then, everyone copies that. What works is always changing. On top of that, I think we do have a team full of guys with great speed who can really skate. It isn't like we have a bunch of big, slow guys who can only check.

 

[Jackets16]

-Totally disagree that 2016-17 Werenerski will be better than 2016-17 Tyutin. 2018-19 certainly, likely even 2017-18 but he's never played a minute in the NHL.

I know you don't know how to be anything but negative, but you can't be serious. He probably would have been better than him last year. Tyutin was bad. It would be hard for him not to be better.

 

[pete goegan]

Bottom line is "a lot of us" (and by that I mean, even if you didn't, everyone) don't know what the hell we're talking about. Even the most reasoned, supportable by evidence or even expert position is impacted by the unavoidable fact that the games are played by people, who get hurt, have bad days, make unexpected improvements, get good news from home, get advice from siblings, feel sluggish, have a really good workout, etc.

This is not to say that optimistic vs. pessimistic (no people, the opposite of optimistic isn't "realistic") isn't a discussion worth having, nor that we can't learn things from such discussion, ONly that this is why I'm rarely either optimistic or pessimistic. I am glad when the team is doing well, and bummed when it isn't, and to a greater degree depending on how well or poorly. It's why my avatar continues to be a bunny with a pancake on its head.

I agree.

(Might that be why my avatar is a hockey player who last played in the NHL a half-century ago and died in '08?)

 

[Monk]

One...million....dollars.

And probably "differently."

This. But we could also probably look at points and +/- as a starting point. Wouldn't be very difficult to be better than Toots in either category.

 

[major major]

What about the concern that the Blues/Boston method of constructing a team (defense first, physical play, score by committee) is no longer a valid approach? That now teams need to be high speed, offensive, puck possession teams lead by a couple of franchise players like Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Washington?

Get Malkin and Crosby is not a strategy.

Also you seem to have mixed up having great D with playing a physical defense first game. That could be just the opposite. When you have smarter D it makes it easier to run systems where they're always jumping into the play to ramp up the scoring. Jones, Murray, and Werenski are those kind of D.

You've also mixed up puck possession with speed and offense - the best possession team of our era is the Kings, and they play a grinding style.

 

[NotWendell]

That's fair. I guess we'll just have to keep our fingers crossed for Saad, Bjorkstrand, PLD, etc to become those star forwards.

I think Saad has the makings of becoming a star forward. So that's one (someday). We need two.

 

[major major]

Why I think the D will be better:

1) A full camp with the coaching staff in place to implement a structure in pre-season, not the regular season.
2) Murray and Jones played big minutes for the first time in their career and should be expected to improve their ability to handle that this year
3) The hiring of Shaw to work with the defense
4) Tyutin is not only not in the top 4 but not on the team
5) This will be one of the most mobile defensive units in the league
6) Werenski will not be playing big minutes until he earns more time.

Again, may be a pipe dream but I refuse to believe the D will be as bad as last year. The simple fact that JJ won't need to play against top lines night in and night out is very big in my book. I think he'll be a very, very good 2nd pair d-man. And we haven't been able to say that since he came to the CBJ

I think you're absolutely right that the D is going in the right direction. The big 3 will be great. I'd only caution that we don't really know when they will be. It could be that they're not up to speed this year and it's only the year after that they are mature enough.

I also doubt that JJ warrants "very very good 2nd pair d-man" - his limitations in passing are going to hurt him at every level. Instead I'm hoping for average 2nd pair d-man.

 

[major major]

I think Saad has the makings of becoming a star forward. So that's one (someday). We need two.

I think we're already really close to fitting the Bruins 2011 model. Their top scorers the year they won the cup were Krejci 62 pts, Lucic 62 pts, Bergeron 57 pts, Horton 53, then Recchi 48, Ryder 41, Marchand 41, and <30 pts: Campbell, Wheeler, Seguin, etc...

Saad, Wennberg, Bjorkstrand, and Dubois are the likely candidates to step up. Can they end up matching Krejci, Lucic, Bergeron, and Horton? I think so.

 

[Crede777]

I don't believe that for one. One thing works in a sport and then everyone copies it. Then, a few years later, some team does something else that works. Then, everyone copies that. What works is always changing. On top of that, I think we do have a team full of guys with great speed who can really skate. It isn't like we have a bunch of big, slow guys who can only check.

Yes but teams that copy rarely work. Instead of trying to model our team after another (St. Louis), I think they should be looking for the next way to win. St. Louis Blues / Boston Bruins style hockey had its day around 2009. Then comes the high speed game lead by a world class talent or two (Hawks, Pens, Caps). Instead of trying to model the team after something that was successful years ago, they need to be looking towards what will work next.

As for getting Malkin/Crosby not being a strategy, it may not be, but it might be a necessity nonetheless.

Maybe someone on this team exceeds expectations, but honestly I don't think this team will gain traction until they can win a guy like Nolan Patrick in the draft. They have good depth (which is what a team like Edmonton is missing), but they're lacking a Tavares/Kane/Benn/Ovechkin/Crosby. Heck, even St.Louis has Tarasenko.

 

[major major]

Yes but teams that copy rarely work. Instead of trying to model our team after another (St. Louis), I think they should be looking for the next way to win. St. Louis Blues / Boston Bruins style hockey had its day around 2009. Then comes the high speed game lead by a world class talent or two (Hawks, Pens, Caps). Instead of trying to model the team after something that was successful years ago, they need to be looking towards what will work next.

As for getting Malkin/Crosby not being a strategy, it may not be, but it might be a necessity nonetheless.

Maybe someone on this team exceeds expectations, but honestly I don't think this team will gain traction until they can win a guy like Nolan Patrick in the draft. They have good depth (which is what a team like Edmonton is missing), but they're lacking a Tavares/Kane/Benn/Ovechkin/Crosby. Heck, even St.Louis has Tarasenko.

There's a variety of ways to win. Some teams can take an approach to its fullest, with great success. And of course writers will say it's "the new NHL!". But have the fundamentals of the game actually changed in the last 10 years?

The Blues might be coming down, but the "Blues style" is every bit as relevant now as it was 5 or 10 years ago. Heck the Kings have won 2 of the last 5 cups. The "next way to win" could be the same damn thing.

And I don't even know if I'd say that the Jackets are following the Blues playbook. Personnel is somewhat similar but is the style really the same?

 

[Cowumbus]

I think we're already really close to fitting the Bruins 2011 model. Their top scorers the year they won the cup were Krejci 62 pts, Lucic 62 pts, Bergeron 57 pts, Horton 53, then Recchi 48, Ryder 41, Marchand 41, and <30 pts: Campbell, Wheeler, Seguin, etc...

Saad, Wennberg, Bjorkstrand, and Dubois are the likely candidates to step up. Can they end up matching Krejci, Lucic, Bergeron, and Horton? I think so.

I'm sorry major but I think you and everyone else are vastly overrating our players potential. I don't see how Saad, Wennberg, Bjorkstarnd (12 games played) and Dubois (0 GP) are gonna put up the points like those guys did. Also half that team can play D better than any of our forwards except maybe Duby and Wennberg.

Saad had a CAREER year and still only had 53 points... And led the team with that. I'd love to be proven wrong but I just do not see how we will be a good team unless players overachieve this year.

Bergeron and Krejci are better than any centers we have. We need ELITE players to be good, I don't see any ELITE players on our team. Don't give me BS either on how how player X will be elite one day.Saad is probably the closest thing but we need a couple guys who can pot 65+ points a year consistently.

 

[major major]

I'm sorry major but I think you and everyone else are vastly overrating our players potential. I don't see how Saad, Wennberg, Bjorkstarnd (12 games played) and Dubois (0 GP) are gonna put up the points like those guys did.

You think 53-63 pts is that high?

Saad had 53 pts, he's 23 years old, so it's reasonable to think he can hit 55 or 60. He has the skill set to do more (I don't say that about everyone, Jenner for example).

Wennberg had 39 pts in his last 54 games, which is a 60 pt pace. It's normal for younger players to have great stretches, and what defines prime is doing it consistently. I think he hits 60-65 in a couple years.

We don't know, but you certainly can't rule out Bjorkstrand becoming a 50+ pt winger. His release is rare at any level.

Dubois is a ways off, but given his play to date and build, 55-60 pts is absolutely not an unreasonable expectation. Huberdeau is the closest comparison statistically and just hit 59 pts.

Saad is probably the closest thing but we need a couple guys who can pot 65+ points a year consistently.

Sure, but just so you know that's more perennial 65+ pt guys than the Bruins or Kings have (or if you want to be technical, the Blackhawks have).