Speculation: Who should be the new GM of the Washington Capitals?

[Devil Dancer]

I'm all in for Shero if he lets someone else put together the draft board. Shero's trading + Caps' drafting could be a nice combination.

 

[Ridley Simon]

I'm all in for Shero if he lets someone else put together the draft board. Shero's trading + Caps' drafting could be a nice combination.

Shero was also very aggressive with FA's.

Shero and Trotz bring instant credibility to this franchise, around the league. Something they sorely need.

 

[strungout]

You boys have talked me into Shero. Of course at this point I'd be happy to learn that Ted is actually aware there's a staff shortage.

 

[um]

You boys have talked me into Shero. Of course at this point I'd be happy to learn that Ted is actually aware there's a staff shortage.

i imagine Teds situation is somewhat like this

 

[fedfed]

You are so emphatic about Chicago, you mentioned them twice? I assume you meant the Bruins? And they do pick up players during the season, and at the deadline.

Let's look at the Easts remaining two teams. Habs and Rags. Both made significant moves during the season, and at the deadline. Vanek and St Louis?

I also see that the Kings added Gaborik at the TDL. Thats not significant?

It all comes down to what you see the Caps as being. Frankly, once they got Ovechkin, they are a team that isn't going to rebuild. George kept us looking that way due to all the young players he kept force feeding the team....but they should not be rebuilding unless you trade 8. George traded youth for Ribeiro and Erat. Those were obviously the wrong players to change course on.

You honestly think that had Shero been the GM since 2008, for the Caps, that their playoff failures would have been the same? I don't. I think the team would have looked worlds different, as Shero values things apart from George.

Shero is a good hire for this time. The team, the fans, the franchise, need it.

So it probably won't happen.

I'm not sure I need to explain the difference between getting Martin St. Louis, Thomas Vanek or Marian Gaborik as opposed to Douglas Murray and Brenden Morrow... IMO, the difference is pretty obvious. I wasn't against big deadline deals. I'm against "Let's trade our youth for "veteran presence", "grit" and 10 points in the season" which is what Shero brought.

I'm not saying they should re-build, but Shero hasn't been to the Cup finals since Malkin and Staal were on ELCs. I think that tells a lot about his cap management ability. Unfortunately, Caps don't have Malkin and Staal on ELCs.

Their playoff failures would be different. They would still be failures. Shero, once his stars were paid fairly, couldn't get the Pens over the hill. Why should we expect him to be able to do that with four highest-paid players making a total of ~$27M, considering one of those players is always injured?

Comparing 2009 Pens and 2014 Caps makes no sense for the reasons outlined above. Entirely different stage of team development.

Had he won with three highly-paid stars, I'd agree on Shero (of course, if he doesn't touch Mahoney and Co.) But we're just, as Russians say, confuse the warm and the soft here (bring in evidence that is just irrelevant).

 

[Langway]

http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/ho...crease-wont-ease-penguins-roster-dilemma.html

10. Boston's Peter Chiarelli might be getting lonely. It would be no surprise if he lost Benning and several sources indicate another valuable member of his staff, Don Sweeney, interviewed in Washington. (Chiarelli declined to comment).

11. Didn't expect to hear much about the Capitals until after the NBA Wizards were eliminated, which happened late last week to Indiana. There were a lot of conflicting rumours about their openings, but Sweeney was interviewed and it sounds like Nashville's Paul Fenton was too. (Glenn Healy reported last week Fenton also met with the Canucks). Of course, Shero's availability alters everything. If he'd stayed in Pittsburgh and Bylsma was out, the belief was Shero would chase Barry Trotz, since they worked together in Nashville. It sure makes sense for Washington, but as I write this, there is no evidence it is close to reality.

12. The toughest part of this search is determining where things stand with Wayne Gretzky. There definitely were conversations, but it's hard to pin down what's happening. One of the considerations for Washington is who would run the organization with him. CSN Washington's Chuck Gormley mentioned Sportsnet's Doug MacLean, and it makes sense. Again, though, it's tough to know for sure.

Relieved to read those AGM names given the previous short retread list.

 

[Capitlols]

Shero & Trotz please.

 

[Marshall]

Gretzky and Dancin' Dougie? Dear God no.

I am now on the Sweeney train.

 

[stanleycaps18]

Benning/Sweeny/Fenton/Shero is my order.

 

[Atlas]

We have two things working against us. 1) Ted is not a hockey guy. He bought a hockey team because he thought his plane might crash. That's a bad reason to buy a hockey team. 2) The Caps organization and market would not be very attractive for the top administrative talents. The Caps have always been filler. It will take a special hire to change the culture here.

 

[Brian23]

We have two things working against us. 1) Ted is not a hockey guy. He bought a hockey team because he thought his plane might crash. That's a bad reason to buy a hockey team. 2) The Caps organization and market would not be very attractive for the top administrative talents. The Caps have always been filler. It will take a special hire to change the culture here.

I think being "filler" is a good thing. There's no expectations but even past that, no GM is gonna turn down a team because they have no history of success. The only thing that would turn one off is a stingy and meddlesome owner and potentially someone with an itchy firing finger. Even that doesn't stop some.

 

[Langway]

Ownership will spend and the support staff doesn't need to be absolutely gutted so from a resources standpoint it could be a lot worse. If a prospective GM is turned off it will be based on something that happens in the interview and/or their thoughts on the existing core rather than a historical assessment.

 

[Atlas]

I think being "filler" is a good thing. There's no expectations but even past that, no GM is gonna turn down a team because they have no history of success. The only thing that would turn one off is a stingy and meddlesome owner and potentially someone with an itchy firing finger. Even that doesn't stop some.

The best people want to work at the best companies, Brian. The NHL is no different. The Caps have been a second or third-rate organization. That can change but someone will have to change it. It won't happen by accident.

 

[Holtbyisms]

We have two things working against us. 1) Ted is not a hockey guy. He bought a hockey team because he thought his plane might crash. That's a bad reason to buy a hockey team. 2) The Caps organization and market would not be very attractive for the top administrative talents. The Caps have always been filler. It will take a special hire to change the culture here.

This is something I keep hearing but I actually tend to disagree.

You'd be able to come in and pick your own coach. It seems clear they plan on GM first to hire a coach.

There's already a top talent in Ovechkin and you have some very nice pieces up front surrounding him.

You have a pretty solid pool of prospects. Definitely in the upper half of the league talent wise in the pipeline. A handful of which are on the fence of some big time NHL minutes. Allowing the next point to be true.

You have tradeable assets in guys like Brouwer, Johansson and possibly Laich if anyone is willing to take a chance on his groin.

You also have a very strong and very rabid fanbase. We may not be as storied as many franchises but in the Ovechkin era we've come a very long way and made our building a hard place to play in.

Say what you will about Leonsis but he would provide you with an owner who is willing to spend to the cap every year.

I honestly think with a respectable defense(which is clearly the downside of taking over the caps) and a coach who has some experience we become a contender in the near future.

 

[Atlas]

Holtbyisms,

Ovie gave us credibility. No doubt. But what have the Caps done with that? He has filled the building and sold some advertising. That's about it. If Ovie retires tomorrow will the building stay full? Is the franchise better? To me, the franchise appears to be a total mess.

I do agree with you that the Caps have some assets to trade. A great hockey mind could make some trades, teach the team to play D, acquire depth at Center, and build a strong franchise.

 

[SimplySensational]

Well Sweeney over Benning shouldn't be surprising...

Benning is the guy who can't scout talent out of your organisation and Sweeney is in charge of talent within your org, aka the "we like our team," route.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

I was glad to hear the Don Sweeney news, and hoping to hear similar news about Joe Will.

My preference for a candidate would be someone that stays on the cutting edge of analytics and uses it to supplement classic scouting. I think that's the best path to take to stay relevant and competitive for the long haul.

No thanks on purely 'old school' guys.

 

[txpd]

Holtbyisms,

Ovie gave us credibility. No doubt. But what have the Caps done with that? He has filled the building and sold some advertising. That's about it. If Ovie retires tomorrow will the building stay full? Is the franchise better? To me, the franchise appears to be a total mess.

I do agree with you that the Caps have some assets to trade. A great hockey mind could make some trades, teach the team to play D, acquire depth at Center, and build a strong franchise.

I think you are being far too pessimistic. If the Ov era were to be replaced by a repeat of the Langway or Konowalchuk era, the building stays full. If Ov retired tomorrow and the Caps made the playoffs with some optimism thru the season, the building would remain full.

Conversely if the Caps ran two or three seasons of stinkatude with Ov winning scoring titles, I think they would sell out less. They are not filling the building with people coming to see Ovechkin score a goal and go home.

 

[ChibiPooky]

I was glad to hear the Don Sweeney news, and hoping to hear similar news about Joe Will.

My preference for a candidate would be someone that stays on the cutting edge of analytics and uses it to supplement classic scouting. I think that's the best path to take to stay relevant and competitive for the long haul.

No thanks on purely 'old school' guys.

I think this is a pretty good approach to pro scouting, but unless I'm wrong (and I could easily be) isn't the CHL (and other leagues out of which players are typically drafted) pretty bad in terms of consistently tracking shot statistics (especially shot attempt-but-not-on-goal and blocked shots)? Seems tough to do for prospects and maybe not all that useful as their game develops.

 

[g00n]

I think you are being far too pessimistic. If the Ov era were to be replaced by a repeat of the Langway or Konowalchuk era, the building stays full. If Ov retired tomorrow and the Caps made the playoffs with some optimism thru the season, the building would remain full.

Conversely if the Caps ran two or three seasons of stinkatude with Ov winning scoring titles, I think they would sell out less. They are not filling the building with people coming to see Ovechkin score a goal and go home.

Jagr and Ovechkin both caused spikes in attendance, but they didn't fill the building. Winning did that. As it always does in this market unless we're talking about the Skins.

And it's a delayed effect. The boost comes the following season. Pretty much guarantee the Wiz will see increased attendance next year, especially if they don't stink right out of the gate. Caps may tread water or continue to decline.

 

[strungout]

I think this is a pretty good approach to pro scouting, but unless I'm wrong (and I could easily be) isn't the CHL (and other leagues out of which players are typically drafted) pretty bad in terms of consistently tracking shot statistics (especially shot attempt-but-not-on-goal and blocked shots)? Seems tough to do for prospects and maybe not all that useful as their game develops.

Unless you have scouts keeping the numbers.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

I think this is a pretty good approach to pro scouting, but unless I'm wrong (and I could easily be) isn't the CHL (and other leagues out of which players are typically drafted) pretty bad in terms of consistently tracking shot statistics (especially shot attempt-but-not-on-goal and blocked shots)? Seems tough to do for prospects and maybe not all that useful as their game develops.

Unless you have scouts keeping the numbers.

Yup. I highly doubt any of the top analytics organizations use league-provided numbers. I'm guessing they either have scouts track their own stats in person, or someone tracking stats from tape.

 

[Langway]

I don't think analytics are necessary when it comes to amateur scouting. It would be an interesting thing to have to see if it tracks with the eye test but you can't really track those figures on your own. There are too many games. You could maybe do it via video but that's limited and not worth the man hour investment. There are ways to slice and dice traditional boxcar stats at the junior level so you could, say, get a sense of even-strength scoring alone. I think it's hard to beat the eye test at that level.

Now when those players get to the pro level and when you're evaluating NHLers across the league that becomes a lot easier to look at. Overall I think analytics is mainly useful and worthwhile in evaluating your own team, coaching staff and overall approach. From there it can be useful in deciding what players to trade/acquire to supplement what you've already got in place. I'd have to think the most advanced analytics going on out there is exclusively analyzing your own NHL team because there's a strategic advantage to be had in doing so at a higher level. Everything else is a matter of supplementation and aiding personnel moves.

 

[Brian23]

The best people want to work at the best companies, Brian. The NHL is no different. The Caps have been a second or third-rate organization. That can change but someone will have to change it. It won't happen by accident.

You're talking like these guys have options to go to the Red Wings or other top tier organizations.

Reality is, if you're hiring a GM you're not normally a good team. The guys who've never been a GM are gonna take any opportunity to stake their claim and those who're out of the job normally have a reason they're out of a job. You're acting as if they have to choose between working at Mickey D's instead of some posh 5 star restaurant.

 

[Hivemind]

I really doubt there's an organization that relies on analytics for amateur scouting. Too many games compared to not nearly enough scouts employed by each organization. I've seen scouting reports that break down every event for an individual player in an individual game, but never any comprehensive data base or anything like that. Even if you could assemble such a database, to attempt to glean meaningful conclusions from it would be incredibly difficult. There's simply too many variables in play, between all the different leagues involved to the relative age and maturity of players, etc.

Most importantly, amateur scouting isn't so much about how the player currently performs, but how they will perform later on. Analytics are an incredible tool for pro scouting and management, one that I want the Capitals on the cutting edge of. However, amateur scouting is more about projection. You need to assess if a player has the physical tools (or will have the physical tools) for their current level performance to translate (or improve) in the professional ranks.