The Jarmo Thread

[NotWendell]

Jarmo is a top 5 -10 GM in the NHL.

I find this statement laughable. Our prospect pool ranks at the bottom of the NHL. We finished with one of the worst records in the league. Our centers are probably the worst in the league. Jarmo employed a head coach for a full year who didn't want to be here - and his players knew about it. His heavy-handed tactics with young players have caused them to want to leave the organization. He's jettisoned many heart-and-soul guys who gave their all to this club (Calvert, MacKenzie, Gagner, etc.) just to save money by giving the job to prospects who are" ready to take a step" but never do. Let's not forget that William Karlsson and Jonathan Marchessault play for Vegas now - thanks in part to the non-insured Nathan Horton deal. And the level of continuous drama has been off the charts his entire tenure.

If Jarmo fails to have a big summer that resigns Jones, adds a top 6 center, rebuilds the coaching staff and changes his mentality of using "hammer" on RFAs, he needs to be shown the door before the season starts.

 

[NotWendell]

This is also a bit unfair because in all 3 of the years we lost in the first round, that team went on to win the Stanley Cup. And in 2 of the 3 (Tampa and Washington) we were arguably the biggest challenge/most threatening of their 4 series wins. And I guess part of the rationale that could be slightly fair is we put ourselves in bad seeding, but then you look at the third of those years (Pittsburgh) and we had the 4th-most points in all of hockey.

We should have a banner made for that season. 4th most points in hockey! (but champion of actually nothing) /s

 

[Long Live Lyle]

We should have a banner made for that season. 4th most points in hockey! (but champion of actually nothing) /s

That wasn’t at all my point, but thanks.

 

[Monk]

Logical conclusion is guys doing a good job keep their jobs. Those that don't lose their jobs.
For Columbus many folks are happy with Jarmo for having limited success.
In Toronto over same period of time (arguable they are in better shape than us right now, but they did have some bad years) they have been thru 3 GMs.

The Binary Boys ride again!

 

[NotWendell]

That wasn’t at all my point, but thanks.

I know. I'm a bit salty because it's been 20 years and we don't have a single banner of consequence hanging in our rafters. I want more than what's been previously delivered.

 

[db2011]

I agree that this summer is a big pivot point for Jarmo, but I think he'll manage it fine. He has done things that have rubbed me the wrong way, but a lot of the takeaways here about him I find to be bonkers. It seems like half of the detractors are getting on him for insisting on a culture, and the other half are lamenting that Columbus isn't like O6, prestige organizations. Those are contradictory complaints.

And we're supposed to somehow think that having three GMs in the last several years is a ...desirable thing?

Jarmo brings the team and Columbus respectability. Stay the course.

I'm not a JK or the highway guy by any means, but there just seems to be a lot of reactionary positions here that, if they were followed, would likely result in chaos.

 

[CBJx614]

Most serious organization get to the 2nd round of the playoffs more than once every 8 years (since Jarmo started). Just pure facts show over 25% of the league makes it to the 2nd round each year, meaning after 8 years an average team has been there twice. I get it we went to the playoffs several years in a row, but after 20 years getting there isn't the goal (that's my opinion, maybe others are happy getting there and trusting that somehow someday the chips may fall right when the playoffs start).

Listen I'm not saying fire Jarmo but I do think you need more controls (or at least voices) on the hockey side. I don't honestly care if he is respected. I would rather have a guy every other team hated that was winning like crazy.

It's never that black and white.

I would imagine if you listed the teams that made it, a chunk of those teams would be repeats of previous seasons. I mean for about a decade it was basically cycling through Chicago, LA, Detroit and Pittsburgh, Boston and Washington.

That's about half of each conferences playoff spots.

 

[Long Live Lyle]

I know. I'm a bit salty because it's been 20 years and we don't have a single banner of consequence hanging in our rafters. I want more than what's been previously delivered.

No worries, I understand. I thought you made a lot of good points in your post at the top of this page, but I'm still in favor of keeping Jarmo for now.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I agree that this summer is a big pivot point for Jarmo, but I think he'll manage it fine. He has done things that have rubbed me the wrong way, but a lot of the takeaways here about him I find to be bonkers. It seems like half of the detractors are getting on him for insisting on a culture, and the other half are lamenting that Columbus isn't like O6, prestige organizations. Those are contradictory complaints.

And we're supposed to somehow think that having three GMs in the last several years is a ...desirable thing?

Jarmo brings the team and Columbus respectability. Stay the course.

I'm not a JK or the highway guy by any means, but there just seems to be a lot of reactionary positions here that, if they were followed, would likely result in chaos.

There's so much wrong with this post, I don't know where to start.

If it weren't for the almost-everyone-makes-it-in playoff format of last season, the CBJ would be 2 years outside the playoffs with the past season being a drop into the bowels of the league with very strong prospects of remaining there for several years to come.

Replacing a GM who has had very mediocre results in 8+ years hardly constitutes a game of GM musical chairs. Not a thing undesirable about recognizing that the GM has outlived his usefulness and replacing him after almost a decade on the job.

The prospect pool is close to bare. That's a pretty good indicator that the GM isn't doing his job. His ability to deal with RFAs is putrid. His complete inability to successfully lock in his best young talent because of some idiotic and misguided philosophy about "the team having the leverage" on RFAs is alone valid grounds for his dismissal.

20 years of a franchise with one real playoff series win. 2 years of franchise free fall-which I guess is "respectability" to some. Yeah, stay the course

 

[EspenK]

I agree that this summer is a big pivot point for Jarmo, but I think he'll manage it fine.

Based on what? Getting hit in the head with the Saad for Panarin trade that Chicago was forced to make by the cap? The Wennberg fiasco. Keeping a coach who didn't want to be here. Buying out Hartnell AFTER the expansion draft thereby taking up a protection spot? Pissing off Anderson?
Trading up to get Gabe Carlsson? Drafting Marko with a 1st round pick? Not trading Panarin & Bob when they could have returned future assets? Mortgaging the future for an ill advised run at the Cup? Fearing an offer sheet that he gave away Ryan Murray & Marcus Nutivara?

Please explain why you think he'll manage it fine.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Based on what? Getting hit in the head with the Saad for Panarin trade that Chicago was forced to make by the cap? The Wennberg fiasco. Keeping a coach who didn't want to be here. Buying out Hartnell AFTER the expansion draft thereby taking up a protection spot? Pissing off Anderson?
Trading up to get Gabe Carlsson? Drafting Marko with a 1st round pick? Not trading Panarin & Bob when they could have returned future assets? Mortgaging the future for an ill advised run at the Cup? Fearing an offer sheet that he gave away Ryan Murray & Marcus Nutivara?

Please explain why you think he'll manage it fine.

I'd forgotten about these managerial gems. Thanks.

 

[EDM]

This is all music to my ears. Jarmo is a bungling egomaniacal jerk. When the only thing a GM has to promote in TV commercials is himself .........you have entered The MacLean Zone.

 

[MoeBartoli]

Based on what? Getting hit in the head with the Saad for Panarin trade that Chicago was forced to make by the cap? The Wennberg fiasco. Keeping a coach who didn't want to be here. Buying out Hartnell AFTER the expansion draft thereby taking up a protection spot? Pissing off Anderson?
Trading up to get Gabe Carlsson? Drafting Marko with a 1st round pick? Not trading Panarin & Bob when they could have returned future assets? Mortgaging the future for an ill advised run at the Cup? Fearing an offer sheet that he gave away Ryan Murray & Marcus Nutivara?

Please explain why you think he'll manage it fine.

Doesn’t sound like you’re part of the “In Jarmo We Trust” Club.
Kidding aside, Actually some quite fair points though I think going for the Cup was a reasonable shot though not without cost.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I'd forgotten about these managerial gems. Thanks.

The jackets and Vegas had a deal months before the expansion draft. That “gem” means nothing, since it was already agreed they were getting karlsson

 

[EspenK]

The jackets and Vegas had a deal months before the expansion draft. That “gem” means nothing, since it was already agreed they were getting karlsson

Although one could argue that Jarmo should have known Hartnell's shelf life was limited and was going to be bought out.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Although one could argue that Jarmo should have known Hartnell's shelf life was limited and was going to be bought out.

Wasnt he literally bought out a few weeks later?

 

[DarkandStormy]

Wasnt he literally bought out a few weeks later?

Yes, so why waste that protection spot? If you don't know in, let's say, March, that you're buying out the guy in June, that's terrible management.

If the deal was, "here's a 1st, a 2nd, and Clarkson to not take Anderson, Calvert, Jack Johnson (LOL), and Korpisalo," does that 2nd become a 3rd or 4th if Anderson is off the table?

 

[db2011]

Based on what? Getting hit in the head with the Saad for Panarin trade that Chicago was forced to make by the cap? The Wennberg fiasco. Keeping a coach who didn't want to be here. Buying out Hartnell AFTER the expansion draft thereby taking up a protection spot? Pissing off Anderson?
Trading up to get Gabe Carlsson? Drafting Marko with a 1st round pick? Not trading Panarin & Bob when they could have returned future assets? Mortgaging the future for an ill advised run at the Cup? Fearing an offer sheet that he gave away Ryan Murray & Marcus Nutivara?

Please explain why you think he'll manage it fine.

What is the Wennberg fiasco, his last contract?

I said he's done things to rub me the wrong way, and you've hit on some of those things. But you are going to extremes (a new tendency for you, it seems) and we'll just disagree on our takes. I don't find the run at the Cup ill-advised at all. We got knocked out by the Bruins in six, who went on to sweep the Conference Finals and took the Finals to 7 games.

Discrediting Jarmo on getting Panarin in the first place I'm not even going to take seriously. Torts is a good coach who will likely be coaching next year, and who was under contract. Yes I want him coaching the team. I thinking holding onto Panarin and Bob is a debatable thing, I frankly like his position there but I can see both sides. That you will criticize him for not trading for future assets comes as no surprise. Ye of the draft board fascination are always banging on about shiny new things and seem willing to mortgage the present on the future.

I think he'll manage it fine, but I could be wrong. I guess that strikes a nerve with you.

 

[majormajor]

Based on what? Getting hit in the head with the Saad for Panarin trade that Chicago was forced to make by the cap? The Wennberg fiasco. Keeping a coach who didn't want to be here. Buying out Hartnell AFTER the expansion draft thereby taking up a protection spot? Pissing off Anderson?
Trading up to get Gabe Carlsson? Drafting Marko with a 1st round pick? Not trading Panarin & Bob when they could have returned future assets? Mortgaging the future for an ill advised run at the Cup? Fearing an offer sheet that he gave away Ryan Murray & Marcus Nutivara?

Please explain why you think he'll manage it fine.

This is when you know someone is so biased in their comment that you can stop reading right there.

 

[EspenK]

What is the Wennberg fiasco, his last contract?

Well, that didn't work out so well.Then buying him out without any hint of trying to trade him.Maybe he tried to trade him and no one would bite but I doubt he even tried.

I said he's done things to rub me the wrong way, and you've hit on some of those things. But you are going to extremes (a new tendency for you, it seems) and we'll just disagree on our takes. I don't find the run at the Cup ill-advised at all. We got knocked out by the Bruins in six, who went on to sweep the Conference Finals and took the Finals to 7 games.

In retrospect it was ill advised. They didn't win. Or get to the conference finals. And if they played TB 10 more times I doubt they win a series. And we all can see what the experience got the team. My take is that egos got in the way and all that is left is a team in disarray without the assets trading Bob & Panarin would have brought.


Discrediting Jarmo on getting Panarin in the first place I'm not even going to take seriously.

My point was Jarmo did nothing to make that trade except say yes. Chicago was in cap hell and Panarin had to go (and I suspect Bowman knew he wasn't going to re-sign in Chicago).

Torts is a good coach who will likely be coaching next year, and who was under contract. Yes I want him coaching the team.

A good coach who didn't want to be here any longer. See how that worked out.

I thinking holding onto Panarin and Bob is a debatable thing, I frankly like his position there but I can see both sides. That you will criticize him for not trading for future assets comes as no surprise. Ye of the draft board fascination are always banging on about shiny new things and seem willing to mortgage the present on the future.

See how well not mortgaging the present to improve the future has worked so far.

I think he'll manage it fine, but I could be wrong. I guess that strikes a nerve with you.

Expand original to see responses.

 

[EspenK]

This is when you know someone is so biased in their comment that you can stop reading right there.

So how does saying Jarmo got lucky in the trade for Saad expose bias? I was just saying don't add that to the plus side of his goods and bads.

Does the third man in penalty still exist?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Yes, so why waste that protection spot? If you don't know in, let's say, March, that you're buying out the guy in June, that's terrible management.

If the deal was, "here's a 1st, a 2nd, and Clarkson to not take Anderson, Calvert, Jack Johnson (LOL), and Korpisalo," does that 2nd become a 3rd or 4th if Anderson is off the table?

No. The deal was “you can have karlsson just don’t touch korpisalo and Anderson.”

Hartnell had nothing to do with it. Our protection list was a formality. It meant nothing.

 

[db2011]

Expand original to see responses.

My analysis of something like the deadline moves to make the Cup run doesn't hinge on whether we win the Cup. I liked (most of) the moves, we got results, just not the results we wanted. Until this season, the Jackets remained successful "in spite of" the moves- and this season seems a tough season to base a strong opinion on. If PLD doesn't force things the way he did, I saw us in the playoffs.

I don't like the way Jarmo seemed to give away some players. I feel like he could have gotten better returns for some guys he traded.

With the Torts thing, what would you have had Jarmo do? We don't know how badly Torts wanted out. But if Jarmo fires him, the Jackets still owed Tortorella money. So you're demanding hiring a new coach or promoting a Brad. With the first of those options, you're blaming the guy for not spending money that's not his, for no reason when we had a coach under contract. And there was no way they were going to hire a new coach this year. Your second option... I shudder to imagine what your take would have been when whomever was promoted to interim head coach didn't get results.

I get that you don't like the guy.

 

[LoneFunyan]

No. The deal was “you can have karlsson just don’t touch korpisalo and Anderson.”

Hartnell had nothing to do with it. Our protection list was a formality. It meant nothing.

Isn't the point that if you don't protect Hartnell, you can put Anderson on your protected list and the negotiation with LV becomes "don't take Korpisalo"? Since that player was not thought to be as coveted or important as Anderson, you don't have to offer as much to make that bargain - maybe if we could protect Anderson, we only have to give up X+, where we gave up X++ to have LV steer clear of the unprotected Anderson.

Perhaps the argument is that Jarmo made the deal too early, when Hartnell appeared to have value higher than what he did by the time the draft took place. Maybe by holding out on an agreement with LV he'd have had more options and better perspective on where the valuable pieces were?

I don't know - much as I fault Jarmo for other things, this feels like a "push" at best. Maybe it could have been a better deal if this and that and the other thing but there's too many moving targets to line up to relitigate it.

 

[majormajor]

For those who continually list the Murray and Nutivaara trades on their litany of evils, please consider what these players would be paid if they were to hit UFA. Murray is most likely taking a paycut. We really like those players (and want them back) but the idea that they were significant assets at those cap hits is baloney. Jarmo knew the market for them and got what he could. Perhaps he could have gotten more if he waited but he didn't want to run the risk of being stuck with them in the middle of the league's emergency cap crunch, and that ought to be very understandable.

I don't know - much as I fault Jarmo for other things, this feels like a "push" at best. Maybe it could have been a better deal if this and that and the other thing but there's too many moving targets to line up to relitigate it.

Pretty much. It gets very complicated and then all of that to say it would have cost us a 3rd rounder instead of a 2nd rounder. Not a big deal.

The 1st rounder, for those unaware, was the standard price paid to unload the Clarkson deal.