HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Notices

2012 CBJ Offseason Part III (Proposals, Speculations, Blog Rumors, etc. go here)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2012, 07:21 PM
  #376
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timeless Winter View Post
You're a Blue Jackets fan. Beggars can't be choosers.
********. If you want to be happy with shooting for mediocre so be it, but don't try to tell me what I can or can't expect from a professional sports organization. Keep in mind, Nashville gets the benefit of playing Columbus 6 times a year, a benefit that Columbus does not get.

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 07:31 PM
  #377
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Before you can win the Cup you have to get in the playoffs. Before you can make the playoffs you have to learn how to win. Before you can win you have to learn how to compete.

For a long time all that was said was how we would like to have a team that would compete night in and night out. Now when it would seem that there is just that kind of team being iced, one that is ready to take that first step, we're gonna ***** cuz they're not compeating for the cup? Man that's crazy.

Compete, win, playoffs, Cup. Step at a time. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

__________________
__________________

I post, therefore I am.
Roadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 07:41 PM
  #378
SuperGenius
Moderator
For Duty & Humanity!
 
SuperGenius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,549
vCash: 1138
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
********. If you want to be happy with shooting for mediocre so be it, but don't try to tell me what I can or can't expect from a professional sports organization. Keep in mind, Nashville gets the benefit of playing Columbus 6 times a year, a benefit that Columbus does not get.
Why don't you offer an alternative and move on from stating over and over how much this suggestion annoys you?

I think Nashville is a successfully run organization who is often in a position to be successful. The actual results are a separate consideration, IMO. The important thing I see in Nashville is a strong foundation with savvy management and coaching. The fact that they haven't won a cup means absolutely nothing to me. The fact that they are well run and often in a position to make a cup run means quite a bit.

Winning a cup is the result of preparation, luck and hard work. You can control two of these things. I've yet to see an organization run in a way that guarantees cups. Having 9 cup winners in the last 10 years should make that sort of obvious.

SuperGenius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 08:12 PM
  #379
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperGenius View Post
Why don't you offer an alternative and move on from stating over and over how much this suggestion annoys you?

I think Nashville is a successfully run organization who is often in a position to be successful. The actual results are a separate consideration, IMO. The important thing I see in Nashville is a strong foundation with savvy management and coaching. The fact that they haven't won a cup means absolutely nothing to me. The fact that they are well run and often in a position to make a cup run means quite a bit.

Winning a cup is the result of preparation, luck and hard work. You can control two of these things. I've yet to see an organization run in a way that guarantees cups. Having 9 cup winners in the last 10 years should make that sort of obvious.
I would set my sights on filling the roster with talent playing at the level it should be playing at instead of asking 2nd liners to play on the first line, 2nd pairing defenders playing first pairing minutes, etc. How can you expect to be a top team without top talent? I think Nashville is a perfect example of it. They score by committee and rely on outstanding goaltending and two [now one] solid defenders and for all that fantastic management and coaching we've seen two playoff series wins out of them.

Is that really all you want? Do you realize that if we win two playoff series this season and next we will ultimately have had just as much success in the postseason as Nashville in the same number of years?

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 08:21 PM
  #380
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
I would set my sights on filling the roster with talent playing at the level it should be playing at instead of asking 2nd liners to play on the first line, 2nd pairing defenders playing first pairing minutes, etc.
Any thoughts on how this would have played out/might yet play out this offseason?

__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
Double-Shift Lassť is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 08:28 PM
  #381
Samkow
Global Moderator
Sidney Cosby
 
Samkow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Columbus
Country: Colombia
Posts: 13,518
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Samkow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
Any thoughts on how this would have played out/might yet play out this offseason?
I'm not Fananon, but in looking at the d-core and the 3 first round picks next season, you can make an argument that Howson is trying to do just that. It just isn't going to pay immediate dividends.

__________________
Truth should never get in the way of a good persecution complex.
Samkow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 08:49 PM
  #382
FlaggerX
Registered User
 
FlaggerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samkow View Post
I'm not Fananon, but in looking at the d-core and the 3 first round picks next season, you can make an argument that Howson is trying to do just that. It just isn't going to pay immediate dividends.
Agreed entirely.

FlaggerX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 08:51 PM
  #383
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
Any thoughts on how this would have played out/might yet play out this offseason?
I would not have traded our only top line talent for a couple of third liners, yet another defensive prospect and [likely] a late first rounder. I also would have looked to draft offense with our first round pick this year. Nothing against RM, but this organization was already starved for offense before shipping out its top threat.

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 09:05 PM
  #384
SuperGenius
Moderator
For Duty & Humanity!
 
SuperGenius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,549
vCash: 1138
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
I would set my sights on filling the roster with talent playing at the level it should be playing at instead of asking 2nd liners to play on the first line, 2nd pairing defenders playing first pairing minutes, etc. How can you expect to be a top team without top talent? I think Nashville is a perfect example of it. They score by committee and rely on outstanding goaltending and two [now one] solid defenders and for all that fantastic management and coaching we've seen two playoff series wins out of them.

Is that really all you want? Do you realize that if we win two playoff series this season and next we will ultimately have had just as much success in the postseason as Nashville in the same number of years?
The top team is more often the best team than it is the most talented team. You think top to bottom, that the LAK were the most talented team last year? Boston the year before? a team of 2nd liners that believes what they're doing is a more powerful opposing force than a collection of talent.

I'm not saying you don't need or want talent, because obviously you do, but it is not the only thing that matters, and never at the expense of the team as a whole.

I also happen to agree with others that this is a process. Build from the ground up. Trying to buy random, sexy, popular pieces without a solid foundation is what got the CBJ where they are today.

SuperGenius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 09:30 PM
  #385
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,384
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
I would not have traded our only top line talent for a couple of third liners, yet another defensive prospect and [likely] a late first rounder. I also would have looked to draft offense with our first round pick this year. Nothing against RM, but this organization was already starved for offense before shipping out its top threat.
"A couple of third liners"?

Seriously?

I'm done. There's just no reasoning with some people.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 10:14 PM
  #386
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
"A couple of third liners"?

Seriously?

I'm done. There's just no reasoning with some people.
Ansimov has never been more than a third liner and currently Dubinsky is producing like one. He's a 2nd/3rd liner tweener at best. I'm sorry you can't see that, but you're also in love with the offensive juggernaut that is Nashville as well.

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 10:30 PM
  #387
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperGenius View Post
The top team is more often the best team than it is the most talented team. You think top to bottom, that the LAK were the most talented team last year? Boston the year before? a team of 2nd liners that believes what they're doing is a more powerful opposing force than a collection of talent.

I'm not saying you don't need or want talent, because obviously you do, but it is not the only thing that matters, and never at the expense of the team as a whole.

I also happen to agree with others that this is a process. Build from the ground up. Trying to buy random, sexy, popular pieces without a solid foundation is what got the CBJ where they are today.
You don't have to be the MOST talented team to win, but you actually have to have SOME talent. From the Kings I'd take Kopitar, Williams, Brown, Richards, Doughty and Quick over anybody we have here. And From Boston I'd take Chara, Lucic, Krejci and Thomas over anybody we have here. I'd also want Seguin since he has top line upside and fits the youth movement we're going with.

You can build from the ground up while acquiring potential top tier talent. How is it that in dealing Nash, our best player and the best player in the deal by far, the Rangers didn't even have to give up something that would hurt even a little bit? There should've been one top tier talent coming back, whether he pans out or not is another issue, but these guys with their absolute ceiling if they max out their talents as decent 2nd liners? Don't we already have enough of that? How do you trade a perennial 30 goal scorer, all-star forward and not get a top prospect or a very high pick out of it? That's insane.

I know everyone likes the guys who play their hearts out but I'd take a team of all Rick Nashs or, God forbid, all Jeff Carters over a team of all Derek Dorsetts. At least the talented teams have a good shot at winning night in and night out.

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 10:32 PM
  #388
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,384
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
Ansimov has never been more than a third liner and currently Dubinsky is producing like one. He's a 2nd/3rd liner tweener at best. I'm sorry you can't see that, but you're also in love with the offensive juggernaut that is Nashville as well.
It is a remarkable world we live in when half a point per game means you're fit only for the checking line.

Someone should tell that to Detroit sometime. Or Pittsburgh. Or LA. Or, hell, each and every single other team in the National Hockey League.


Oh, by the way. Nashville was #8 in the league in goals per game last year.
http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/te...2/seasontype/2

And before Rads or AK get mentioned - they combined for less goals for for Nashville than we got out of Derek Dorsett.


Last edited by Viqsi: 08-06-2012 at 10:53 PM. Reason: let's tone it down just a tad
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 10:36 PM
  #389
jdhebner
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: I ain't cousin Basil
Posts: 801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
It is a remarkable world we live in when half a point per game means you're fit only for the checking line.
Indeed. 50+ points puts a player in the top 90 of all NHL squads--meaning that player produces enough to be in the top 3 in scoring on most NHL teams. 40 points puts a player as a top 6 on all but a few NHL teams.....

__________________
47 Flavors of Goal Celebrations.
jdhebner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 10:55 PM
  #390
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,384
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhebner View Post
Indeed. 50+ points puts a player in the top 90 of all NHL squads--meaning that player produces enough to be in the top 3 in scoring on most NHL teams. 40 points puts a player as a top 6 on all but a few NHL teams.....
Honestly, I can't find any NHL teams that don't have a ~40 point forward or two - or even more - in their top-6. (Even the Kings lean on Dustin Penner.) There's quite a few with higher-end talent, but many of them don't have as many 40-point scorers outside of the top-6 as well. And some of those teams seem to have the reputation of being Unstoppable Juggernauts around here.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:11 PM
  #391
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
Oh, by the way. Nashville was #8 in the league in goals per game last year.
http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/te...2/seasontype/2
One aberration does not a system make. Nashville tends to finish middle of the road in G/G. Peaking as high as 5th 6 years ago and dipping as low as 24th 4 years ago. Obviously this system isn't very consistent or predictable. This would probably explain why they're generally a low seed in the playoffs, facing more talented teams, and usually losing, in the first round of the playoffs.

I do find it interesting that even with the team scoring more goals per game than they normally do, they still had the same outcome as usual. Winning no more than 2 games in their losing round. Thanks for pointing that out.

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 05:25 AM
  #392
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
I would not have traded our only top line talent for a couple of third liners, yet another defensive prospect and [likely] a late first rounder. I also would have looked to draft offense with our first round pick this year. Nothing against RM, but this organization was already starved for offense before shipping out its top threat.
So you don't trade Nash? Or you continue to hold, hoping for a better return? I mean, I assumed there would be one, too, but what if there just wasn't? Then what? If you keep Nash and add, say, Galchenyk, who might make the big club but might not, your team looks pretty similar to last year. Who else would you add and how? And what's to be done about the players who are already here?

Double-Shift Lassť is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 06:02 AM
  #393
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
So you don't trade Nash? Or you continue to hold, hoping for a better return? I mean, I assumed there would be one, too, but what if there just wasn't? Then what? If you keep Nash and add, say, Galchenyk, who might make the big club but might not, your team looks pretty similar to last year. Who else would you add and how? And what's to be done about the players who are already here?
I think trading Nash was the right thing to do. The return wasn't great but it is acceptable on paper.

I think drafting Galchenyuk would have been a better move but that ship has sailed.

I think patience is what is needed here; this team is not even close to Cup contender and in my opinion not a playoff team. My big fear is that they will become the Jackets of old and nail down the 6-8 pick. Granted the draft is supposedly deep but if we don't get a no brainer (MacKinnon or Jones) I worry we'll screw it up.

As to the players that are here, none should be viewed as untouchables. Two or three of them and a pick for Bobby Ryan would be nice but probably won't happen. Some of the posters (and Howson) fall too quickly and too hard for anyone wearing the Union Blue-these guys collectively finished 30th. I think Howson should be working hard on more trades but I doubt it. One because I don't think he believes trades are necessary and two I'm not sure anyone wants most of what we would part with.

Bottom line I think the Nashville model is not that great but for starters it sure as hell beat what ever model (think Edsel,Yugo, etc) the Jackets have been using. Ultimately the team has to be a blend of talent and grit and most importantly fit together.

In the future I would like to see the Jackets draft offense and trade some of the blue line depth for more of the same. And pray like heck that Bob or one of the prospect goalies develop into a top 10 goalie.

Side note for all those 1/2 pt a game fans - Someone has to score goals for there to be assists. Just saying.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 07:14 AM
  #394
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
One aberration does not a system make.
Yet one down year makes Dubinsky a third-liner?

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 07:26 AM
  #395
EDM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,889
vCash: 500
It is a re-building year. Relax. It does not happen instantly. At least now they are attempting to do it correctly. I, for one, am willing to ride our the growth process. All I would like to see is some growth this year.

EDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 08:19 AM
  #396
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDM View Post
It is a re-building year. Relax. It does not happen instantly. At least now they are attempting to do it correctly. I, for one, am willing to ride our the growth process. All I would like to see is some growth this year.
Agreed, it's nice to finally see a foundation of hard working players that can be an example for whomever we draft next year.

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 09:26 AM
  #397
Nordique
Registered User
 
Nordique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
You don't have to be the MOST talented team to win, but you actually have to have SOME talent. From the Kings I'd take Kopitar, Williams, Brown, Richards, Doughty and Quick over anybody we have here. And From Boston I'd take Chara, Lucic, Krejci and Thomas over anybody we have here. I'd also want Seguin since he has top line upside and fits the youth movement we're going with.
To put it the way Riccordati would...

You can win with Talent. You can win with hard work. But hard work AND talent, trumps them both.

There is no doubt this team looks more like a hard working team than last year's, with the late season addition of JJ, and the off season additions (notably Foligno, and Dubinsky), coupled with a pretty hard working core from last season (Dorsett, Umberger, Letestu, Prospal, Atkinson). This team lacks sorely in the talent dept in terms of goal scoring/play making.

But where I disagree is the Nash trade. This trade had to happen. For the longest time, I wanted him kept here. But in the end I have to admit this is the only way to move forward, to get the team away from the past and focusing on the future, from the ground up.

IMO, what next needs to happen is a Mason move to further close the book on the dismal past 3 seasons since our playoff debut. I know it won't happen, but I'd love a young tandem of NHL pontential netminders that have some success to build off of. A Bobrovski/Bernier tandem would be my choice. Bernier has reached the pinnacle of success in the AHL, and Bobrovsky had a great year as a starter two seasons ago, before being shuffled into the backup role when Philly brought in Bryzgalov.


Last edited by Nordique: 08-07-2012 at 09:39 AM.
Nordique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 10:23 AM
  #398
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDM View Post
It is a re-building year. Relax. It does not happen instantly. At least now they are attempting to do it correctly. I, for one, am willing to ride our the growth process. All I would like to see is some growth this year.
I'm with you on this.

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 11:21 AM
  #399
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
So you don't trade Nash? Or you continue to hold, hoping for a better return? I mean, I assumed there would be one, too, but what if there just wasn't? Then what? If you keep Nash and add, say, Galchenyk, who might make the big club but might not, your team looks pretty similar to last year. Who else would you add and how? And what's to be done about the players who are already here?
If I'm in the position of Howson and I'm forced to trade Nash, I'm not going to accept my organization becoming completely bereft of first line talent on the ice and in the prospect pool. That means I'm looking for a top 5 pick in return or a top prospect, even if it means we get 2 pieces back for Nash instead of 4.

This board always falls for the great illusion of "it can't get any worse," thinking that change just for change's sake will fix things. Look at the "lowest point as a jackets fan" thread for proof. Well, change for change's sake sure worked out well when we got rid of Hitchcock. And change for change's sake worked out well when we brought in Arniel. Why wouldn't change for change's sake work just as well here with an entire team trying to play a full line above where they belong?

FANonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2012, 11:33 AM
  #400
Skraut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Enter city here
Posts: 10,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
If I'm in the position of Howson and I'm forced to trade Nash, I'm not going to accept my organization becoming completely bereft of first line talent on the ice and in the prospect pool. That means I'm looking for a top 5 pick in return or a top prospect, even if it means we get 2 pieces back for Nash instead of 4.
How many teams with a top 5 pick were on Nash's list?

How would you, or anyone else in Howson's place been able to get those pieces?


Last edited by Skraut: 08-07-2012 at 11:38 AM.
Skraut is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.