HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Columbus Blue Jackets (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   The Rebuild Thread-"You be the GM" (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1139329)

EspenK 03-19-2012 02:57 PM

The Rebuild Thread-"You be the GM"
 
There have been lots of discussion about Nash, Mason, the draft and about the only thing we all (well 99.64%) agree on, that upper management should be replaced. But most of the discussions have taken place in somewhat of a vacuum. So i thought it would be interesting if folks could summarize their ideas as to how they would rebuild/reshape the Jackets. I would urge you to be realistic. I know we all want a #1 in goal, at center and on the blue line. if you can make a case how you would achieve that there may be a spot available for you in Columbus. Have to pass the PI first.

I'm going to think about this for awhile before posting and I'll be interested to see how others would approach this task.

TaketheCannoli 03-19-2012 03:00 PM

You might want to read this thread.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1027111

EspenK 03-19-2012 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaketheCannoli (Post 46345749)
You might want to read this thread.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1027111

I do remember that and just glanced through it. What I was looking for was a bunch of posts similar to the one Cap started it off with rather than a bunch of more trade mase, keep nash, yada yada. In other words if you were the GM what would your strategy be-reshape or rebuild; through trades or draft;what would you take for nash or would you try to keep him, etc.

Not looking to rehash all the old stuff but from where we stand today what would you do. In a perfect world, I wouldn't necessarily seek responses to others strategies. There are individual threads for that.

ViD 03-19-2012 03:21 PM

Fire Houson
Trade Nash for a decent return
Draft Yakupov
Sign a #1 goalie off UFA
Hire adequate GM and management staff
Wait a couple of seasons for team to build up
Playoffs

JF Omalycat 03-19-2012 03:21 PM

I'd start with getting rid of Stinger and adding a lot of hard hitting metal to the playlist. Get them mofo's pumped up, dammit!

Jovavic 03-19-2012 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JF Omalycat (Post 46346613)
I'd start with getting rid of Stinger and adding a lot of hard hitting metal to the playlist. Get them mofo's pumped up, dammit!

Agreed, complete rebranding.

Mayor Bee 03-19-2012 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EspenK (Post 46345623)
There have been lots of discussion about Nash, Mason, the draft and about the only thing we all (well 99.64%) agree on, that upper management should be replaced.

If you ever see someone at a game holding up a sign that says "I am the 0.36%", come say hi to me.;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by EspenK (Post 46346481)
I do remember that and just glanced through it. What I was looking for was a bunch of posts similar to the one Cap started it off with rather than a bunch of more trade mase, keep nash, yada yada. In other words if you were the GM what would your strategy be-reshape or rebuild; through trades or draft;what would you take for nash or would you try to keep him, etc.

Not looking to rehash all the old stuff but from where we stand today what would you do. In a perfect world, I wouldn't necessarily seek responses to others strategies. There are individual threads for that.

Bill James once did an essay on baseball that basically concluded that the most underrated concept in sports is absolute average. He ran a bunch of simulations with a completely average roster at every position and determined that their winning percentage would be between .540 and .570 (or something like that). In baseball, that's a W-L record of somewhere between 88-74 and 92-70. That's right in the thick of the playoffs, if not in, without so much as an above-average player anywhere.

To translate that concept slightly to hockey, what is the reasonable expectations for average? For scoring goals, "average" would be a first-liner who puts up 30 goals, a second-liner who puts up 20, a third-liner who puts up 10-15, and a fourth-liner who puts up 5-10. On the whole, the defenders should be able to pot 40 (less than 7 at each position). That comes out to 250 goals on a year. In any given spot, that's average production, yes? There'd also be around 400 total assists.

What's interesting is that 250 goals is actually above league average; the last four years have seen a per-team average of 228, 239, 233, and 229. This year is on pace for 223 each. Teams can fall short because of injuries, a difference in expectations of what a player's role truly is, or a simple case of a below-average player in that spot. And just because a player is below-average now doesn't mean he will continue to be, particularly for a young and developing player.

Earl Weaver (tired of hearing about him?) talked about how he had the American League's best left fielder in 1982, with something like 37 home runs and 130 RBIs, far exceeding everyone else. The punch line was that it was actually three players, and through use of extensive platooning, the combination of all three was vastly more productive than even the best player in the league at that position could have been.

Mayor Bee 03-19-2012 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EspenK (Post 46348857)
No. It is (was) an attempt to get people to put some thought into what they would do/how they would reconstruct the jackets over the next few years. Apparently, I am not a very effective communicator because out of all the responses so far-one comes close, albeit without a lot of detail, to what i was seeking. The rest-typical internet responses.

Q What day is it?

#1 answer on internet 4:22 p.m. :help::shakehead

Tell you what....now that I've laid the groundwork for my theory and no one's objected to it after 30 minutes, I'll expand.

Let's presume that we're looking at 30 goals from each first-liner, 20 goals for each second-liner, 10-15 for each third-liner, 5-10 from each fourth-liner, and 40 goals from the defensemen.

Can a defense of Jack Johnson, James Wisniewski, Fedor Tyutin, Nikita Nikitin, John Moore, and David Savard rack up 40 goals in a season? I'd say so. Can each score without completely embarrassing themselves in their own zone on a regular basis? I don't see the names "Stralman", "Russell", or "Clitsome" in there, so I'll say yes.

Can Rick Nash score 30 goals in a season? That's an absolute "yes". Can Derick Brassard, Ryan Johansen, or Prospal score 30 in a season? The answer is no, but then the question is whether they set the table enough to boost the output of their linemates. For two, yes, and for the other, not just yet but most will say that "yes" is a foregone conclusion in the near future. Are Umberger, Letestu, and one of Calvert or Atkinson good for 20 a year? For Umberger, it's been "yes", for Letestu, he's probably in the 15-20 range barring injury, and for Calvert and Atkinson, not yet but probably in a year or two. For the rest of the bottom six (MacKenzie, Dorsett, Gillies, Boyce, Boll, Kubalik, Mayorov, and Byers), can any of them get between 5-15 goals a year? This isn't including Huselius at all.

It's the forwards at this point who need a closer look. Is Umberger's down year simply that, or something more? Can Huselius come back strong? Can Mayorov take the next step? Can Kubalik really show something? Can Brassard sustain the pace he's had over the last six weeks? Can Prospal maintain his early-season form, even if occasional games off are needed to stay fresh? Can Calvert rebound after poor play landed him in the AHL? Can Atkinson continue to get stronger and develop into a second-line NHLer as soon as next year?

These are the questions that must be addressed, not a simple "trade this guy" or "get this guy".

Legs 03-19-2012 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JF Omalycat (Post 46346613)
I'd start with getting rid of Stinger and adding a lot of hard hitting metal to the playlist. Get them mofo's pumped up, dammit!

Love it!:yo:

Legs 03-19-2012 04:39 PM

Well, I see this as a "big picture" mess/crisis/problem. Picking good players vs. dumping bad players; rebranding the team; improving our reputation across the NHL; and for Chrissake, bring in new management. I think we all know this is going to take years to do. We'll probably just have to be content with a few playoff runs where we get swept. I do remain optimistic we can get some management shake-up this year.

Legs 03-19-2012 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EspenK (Post 46346481)
In other words if you were the GM what would your strategy be-reshape or rebuild; through trades or draft;what would you take for nash or would you try to keep him, etc.

So are you saying you just want to talk about the player side of the equation versus a bigger picture look at what needs to be done with the existing CBJ organization as a whole? Just want to make sure I'm posting in the right thread.

FunKingJackets 03-19-2012 05:09 PM

Focusing just on the ice.
- Consistent, capable coaching. Some things we do under Richards seem ok, so if we kept him on, whatever.
- Build the D. I was a big Hedja fan, hated seeing him go. We now need to replace him.
- Goal tending. Even if Mason ends up a HoF goalie I'd rather see him traded right now. I simply can't face another season with the potential of him letting CBJ playoff hopes fly past high glove side. Good by Steve. Be good for some other team. It is time for someone else to fail in net for the CBJ.
- Keep Nash until a good deal is offered. It will be. The guy has enough hype around him that some GM will crack and see Nash as the solution to some problem.
- Let Nash keep the C. but do not build the team around Nash. Build the team such that Nash is the extra special 1st line winger you brought in to help your team. I don't know if this makes sense the way I'm saying it but basically focus development, coaching and direction on everyone without Nash. Nash then will be free to add wherever he plays. We need consistent scoring without reliance on Nash.

If you want to talk bodies.

Goalies: ?
Defense: Dump AJ and Lebda, Keep JJ if you have to trade one or two of the other guys to bring in 2 solid capable defense first defensemen do it. Moore and Savard should be 7 and 8.
Forwards: youth movement

EDM 03-19-2012 05:11 PM

Whether Huselius comes back strong or not, will be the concern of another organization. His contract is done and i would hope even idiots like Priest/Howson would resign him since he has barely played since 2010.

pete goegan 03-19-2012 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EDM (Post 46351167)
Whether Huselius comes back strong or not, will be the concern of another organization. His contract is done and i would hope even idiots like Priest/Howson would not resign him since he has barely played since 2010.

You're welcome.

Derby 03-19-2012 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legs (Post 46349919)
Well, I see this as a "big picture" mess/crisis/problem. Picking good players vs. dumping bad players; rebranding the team; improving our reputation across the NHL; and for Chrissake, bring in new management. I think we all know this is going to take years to do. We'll probably just have to be content with a few playoff runs where we get swept. I do remain optimistic we can get some management shake-up this year.

Never mind

EspenK 03-19-2012 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legs (Post 46350331)
So are you saying you just want to talk about the player side of the equation versus a bigger picture look at what needs to be done with the existing CBJ organization as a whole? Just want to make sure I'm posting in the right thread.

Just the player side-assume you are the gm-what would be your approach,how would you go about it, who would you trade, who would you try to obtain, etc.

mt-svk 03-19-2012 05:57 PM

Many things but the first is the culture of winners.

EDM 03-19-2012 07:47 PM

Thank you Petey. That was an egregious typo on my part.

Roadman 03-19-2012 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mayor Bee (Post 46347643)
If you ever see someone at a game holding up a sign that says "I am the 0.36%", come say hi to me.;)

Would two of us be more than .36% :laugh:

JACKETfan 03-20-2012 07:20 AM

Mayor Bee = the Blue Jackets's Billy Beane.

StL is evidence that a bunch of losers can collectively rise to the occasion. How and why that seems to happen every year to a different team is a mystery. Next year maybe it's our turn.

KeithBWhittington 03-20-2012 09:51 AM

Any "rebranding" would also involve a trade of #61 in my opinion.

I'd waive Mason if I can't trade him. If that doesn't work, recall on reentries. If that doesn't work, I buy him out.

Go out and find a veteran tender that still has tread on the tires. Sign him for two years, offer him the chance to compete for the starting job. Bring back Sanford to compete for the starters job, make the loser the backup. Go out and find another "Sanford-type" guy to serve as a veteran guiding hand for Springfield. Begin a concerted effort to build and develop "homegrown" tenders. Let them simmer and bake to perfection in the lower levels of the organization.

Trade Nash for the best package of picks, prospects and young roster players you can get. Find another center thats versatile enough to play on either the third or second line. See if ou can find a taker for Methot. Bring in a veteran crease-clearer type defensive defenseman.

Consistent coaching is a huge key. The player now need to know that shutting down on coaches is now unacceptable. For this aspect, I think the team needs to bring in a guy thats had success in the league, but also isn't "too old" for the room.

DangleDman 03-20-2012 09:56 AM

I think the team must acquire one of Rask, Schneider, or Bernier. Management must step up and find a way to obtain one of these young elite goaltenders. If the CBJ wants to change their identity, this is how they start.

Mayor Bee 03-20-2012 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JACKETfan (Post 46390263)
Mayor Bee = the Blue Jackets's Billy Beane.

Touche. I'd hope that if I have a competitive advantage that no one can explain, I'd never forsake that by allowing a book to be written that explains it all.

Quote:

StL is evidence that a bunch of losers can collectively rise to the occasion. How and why that seems to happen every year to a different team is a mystery. Next year maybe it's our turn.
St. Louis is a great example of how much of a difference a change in coaching style and personality can make. Davis Payne was a bit more loose and allowed for more freedom, and was regarded as more of a "players coach". Hitchcock is much more restrictive and demanding.

Side note: Alex Pietrangelo had 44 points in 72 games this year. Last year he had 43 in 79 games. He played 34 games total the previous year, and 45 the year before that.

KeithBWhittington 03-20-2012 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DangleDman (Post 46394415)
I think the team must acquire one of Rask, Schneider, or Bernier. Management must step up and find a way to obtain one of these young elite goaltenders. If the CBJ wants to change their identity, this is how they start.

I think this would be another "quick fix" attempt by Jackets Management. Acquiring one of these guys will cost more to us (in trades) then signing a FA would and would have us looking even worse if they flamed out here. I don't want anymore high priced goaltenders, not in the immediate future anyways. I want guys that know they probably close to being done and they want to show people they still have some magic left. I'd keep bringing in these "Sanford-types" every few seasons until we have enough developed talent in the pipeline and our homegrown 'tenders start breaking through. Goaltender doesn't have to be a sexy position here.

CapnCornelius 03-20-2012 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mayor Bee (Post 46349377)
Tell you what....now that I've laid the groundwork for my theory and no one's objected to it after 30 minutes, I'll expand.

Let's presume that we're looking at 30 goals from each first-liner, 20 goals for each second-liner, 10-15 for each third-liner, 5-10 from each fourth-liner, and 40 goals from the defensemen.

Can a defense of Jack Johnson, James Wisniewski, Fedor Tyutin, Nikita Nikitin, John Moore, and David Savard rack up 40 goals in a season? I'd say so. Can each score without completely embarrassing themselves in their own zone on a regular basis? I don't see the names "Stralman", "Russell", or "Clitsome" in there, so I'll say yes.

Can Rick Nash score 30 goals in a season? That's an absolute "yes". Can Derick Brassard, Ryan Johansen, or Prospal score 30 in a season? The answer is no, but then the question is whether they set the table enough to boost the output of their linemates. For two, yes, and for the other, not just yet but most will say that "yes" is a foregone conclusion in the near future. Are Umberger, Letestu, and one of Calvert or Atkinson good for 20 a year? For Umberger, it's been "yes", for Letestu, he's probably in the 15-20 range barring injury, and for Calvert and Atkinson, not yet but probably in a year or two. For the rest of the bottom six (MacKenzie, Dorsett, Gillies, Boyce, Boll, Kubalik, Mayorov, and Byers), can any of them get between 5-15 goals a year? This isn't including Huselius at all.

It's the forwards at this point who need a closer look. Is Umberger's down year simply that, or something more? Can Huselius come back strong? Can Mayorov take the next step? Can Kubalik really show something? Can Brassard sustain the pace he's had over the last six weeks? Can Prospal maintain his early-season form, even if occasional games off are needed to stay fresh? Can Calvert rebound after poor play landed him in the AHL? Can Atkinson continue to get stronger and develop into a second-line NHLer as soon as next year?

These are the questions that must be addressed, not a simple "trade this guy" or "get this guy".

Problem--you are factoring in Rick Nash. Ain't gonna be here. And the chances that whoever replaces him is going to put up 30 goals is not good.

The overall problem is that in order to even attempt to test your hypothesis we'd need depth. Something this team lacks. Consider the flip side to your Weaver platoon situation--injuries. What happens if one of those defensemen you named goes down? Will their replacement be able to produce an equivalent amount?

I'm still not convinced the defense (and certainly not the goaltending) is as close to fixed as some seem to think. And a good part of that is depth. Witness Nikitin's performances sans Tyutin, which are all over the place--they work as a pair, but when one of them is without the other the results have not been as good. You could argue the same with Wiz pre-Johnson. There is a fragility to our defense that is troubling.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.