And lest we forget, "If we don't win next year I going to cross the Scioto River but I won't get wet because I'll be standing on Doug MacLean's shoulders."
I always get blasted for this but I believe would not be here if Lamar Hunt had gotten ownership at the beginning.
And lest we forget, "If we don't win next year I going to cross the Scioto River but I won't get wet because I'll be standing on Doug MacLean's shoulders."
I always get blasted for this but I believe would not be here if Lamar Hunt had gotten ownership at the beginning.
If you're saying that the team would no longer be here if Hunt had been majority owner, I agree.
Here are some interesting quotes from players and Richards on the matter of Nash's captaincy:
Either way, a fair question to ask, given the recent developments, is if Nash should remain the Blue Jackets' captain. There are lots of adages in sports. One of them is: "If your captain wants out, you've got trouble."
Not so, say the Blue Jackets. Nash said he wants to keep the 'C.' Interim coach Todd Richards seemed offended that anybody would ask. To a man, players in the Blue Jackets dressing room made it clear they're still lining up behind Nash.
"We know what kind of guy he is," Blue Jackets winger Derek Dorsett said. "It doesn’t matter what all you guys think. You guys can speculate all you want. We’re beside Rick. We think he’s a great captain.
"No one in here is mad at Rick. No one is mad at the Blue Jackets. It is what it is. We’ll move on from it. We know Rick is going to give 110 percent the rest of the way. He’s not going to just throw his stick on the ice. Some people are already speculating that it’s going to be bad blood. Guys were joking around with him today on the ice. Everything is back to normal. It’ll get blown out of proportion, I’m sure, but that’s the media."
Winger R.J. Umberger acknowledged that the trade deadline, which passed at 3 p.m. Monday, was a major distraction. But said that had nothing to do with the actions of Nash, who kept his trade request private from his fellow teammates.
"The only thing I can really think about is just that he’s been here since the start of his career and he’s endured a lot more than anyone else in this locker room," Umberger said. "None of us truly know how much he has had to handle in his time here. He’s been nothing but faithful and loyal to this organization and this community.
"It’s only as awkward as people want to make it. The guys in this locker room won’t make it awkward. We stand behind Nasher. He’s our captain. What fans, the organization do is up to them. But as players, we respect. He deserves that ‘C.’"
Nash said him keeping the "C" is management's decision. If it were up to him, he said, he'd remain the captain.
"I would love to keep it,"*said Nash, who took over*late in the*2007-08 season, ironically enough, after then-captain Adam Foote orchestrated his departure out of the Blue Jackets franchise.
"I believe I’m the leader of this group right now, and these guys. I think, no matter what, nothing has changed in my mind. I will still lead by example and go out there and do everything I can to win games for this city and for these fans."
And then there was Richards, who made it clear that any discussion of Nash being of stripped of the 'C' was, in his mind, out of line.
"When I think of Columbus – and this was previous to me getting here – it was Rick Nash," said Richards, who joined the organization over the summer. "I know, having spent this season with him -- and listening to other people talk, listening to my neighbors talk, listening to my kids talk -- I know what Rick has done for this community and this organization. He’s done it for 10 years. He’s been really committed and very loyal. And now everyone’s questioning it. That’s one thing I have a tough time understanding."
If you're saying that the team would no longer be here if Hunt had been majority owner, I agree.
The Hunt family, led by Lamar, (may he rest in peace), has always been, and continues to be very loyal to Columbus. As far as being a great owner just ask any fan of any franchise they ever owned.
This whole situation stinks, but honestly, Rick Nash is still the only player the Blue Jackets have ever had who I've enjoyed watching game in and game out. I will support him and the team for the remainder of this wasted and miserable season, and in the back of my mind, begin hoping that there is a regime change in the front office soon that can handle things a lot better and give the fans a real team to root for.
If these are Nash's final 20 games as a Jacket, so be it. In the very least I'm going to enjoy them, at least as much as I've "enjoyed" the other games this season...
I dont know where is a problem that Nasher wanted a trade. Hockey is his job, similar like for you your job. If you arent content you want to change your job and its absolutely normal. So, does it mean that you can do it and players not? IMO yes. I would understand when a player would talk stupidities about our team or his agent and he didnt react it but it isnt Nashs case. So, if Rick will be traded in the summer I will wish him the best of his career and he will belong to my faourite player inspite of his asking for a trade, if not it will be good too. We can trade Umberger, Brassard (but after Carter trade I doubt it) or, after Johnson trade, Wisniewski and get a good value.
Winger R.J. Umberger acknowledged that the trade deadline, which passed at 3 p.m. Monday, was a major distraction. But said that had nothing to do with the actions of Nash, who kept his trade request private from his fellow teammates.
"The only thing I can really think about is just that he’s been here since the start of his career and he’s endured a lot more than anyone else in this locker room," Umberger said. "None of us truly know how much he has had to handle in his time here. He’s been nothing but faithful and loyal to this organization and this community.
Probably reading a little too much into this but RJ uses terms like "endured" and "how much he has had to handle."
__________________
"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
Could someone help me out here? Im confused by Nash's interview, by asking them to consider trading him for the rebuild, how exactly is that asking out? Doesnt that mean he would be happy to stay as well? Or is it implied that he wants out? :help
Could someone help me out here? Im confused by Nash's interview, by asking them to consider trading him for the rebuild, how exactly is that asking out? Doesnt that mean he would be happy to stay as well? Or is it implied that he wants out? :help
Nash's answer: 'That's something we'll cross when it comes.'
My translation: 'Not if Priest and Howson are still here.'
FYI, Torg confirmed on Twitter that they did NOT report anything about Nash giving ownership an ultimatum about Howson/Priest. This appears to be a weak rumor at best.
I enjoyed watching Geoff Sanderson, David Vyborny and Ray Whitney. While those teams were not very good, there were some genuinely enjoyable players to watch on those early teams. In fact, I still have more highlight moments in my brain of Sanderson than I do Nash. That goal where Sandy beat the Bruins in overtime .... classic.
I enjoyed watching Geoff Sanderson, David Vyborny and Ray Whitney. While those teams were not very good, there were some genuinely enjoyable players to watch on those early teams. In fact, I still have more highlight moments in my brain of Sanderson than I do Nash. That goal where Sandy beat the Bruins in overtime .... classic.
So, I'm finally getting around to looking more closely at both press conferences. The phrasing is interesting because, particularly in Howson/Patrick's case, they clearly prepped for this.
Howson says that Nash "approached us and asked us to consider trading him."
Also, this happened in "mid to late January."
So, let's re-cap what happened in that time frame. There was an owner's meeting. Shortly thereafter it was leaked that there was not likely to be a shakeup in management. I remember this well because this followed by the Nashville loss was what led to my infamous protest post.
The protest was on the 28th. Which means that at the time of the protest, in all likeliehood, Nash had already requested a trade.
Based on Nash's statement in his press conference it would appear Nash's request came AFTER ownership's meeting and after being informed that the decision coming out of that meeting was that there was to be a rebuild:
Quote:
I was informed by management that there was a rebuild, a reshape, of the team, and I personally felt I could be a huge part of that, toward bringing assets in. I think that was in my view that was the best thing for the team, the organization, and personally for my career.
As the man says "now, stop it right there!" So, ownership meets mid-January. Nash thereafter goes back to them (again, mid-late January) after being told the team intends to rebuild. Notice Howson's words DO NOT state Nash demanded a trade. No. He asked that they consider a trade. Not exactly gun to the head, Dany Heatley stuff.
This all begs the question as to what the rebuilding plan that Nash was told of consisted of? Would a player ask for a trade if the plan were a quick rebuild? Doubtful if they were talking about a simple off-season retooling. Which means the rebuilding plan is more substantial than the "few players" Howson is claiming he needs as of today. (See below for more on this point).
It also begs the question, did they really try to convince Nash to stay. Howson stated in his presser that players can be convinced to stay. But did he try or were they actually hoping all along when they told Nash that he might "volunteer" to be moved?
Nash reiterates that it would be best "for my career." Leaving out the BS about bringing in assets, a rebuild was proposed and Nash determined, based on the rebuild presented, it was best for his career to leave. Which likely means, at the stage of his career he's in, Nash felt sticking around for the rebuild would not give him the opportunity to compete for a Cup during his prime--keep this in mind when management tries to sell us the whole "Win Now!" mantra.
Later Nash tips us off that Howson's public comments about a few pieces is disingenuous in this final exchange:
Quote:
They moved Sammy Paulson yesterday. Last week, Carter and Vermette. Howson said yesterday he thinks if they can fix the goaltending problem and pick up a couple pieces, this can be a competitive team. It does not suggest a rebuild. It doesn’t suggest that they think this is a long-term process to fix this. Does that change for you – that they’re not going to be blowing it up?
Nash's response:
Quote:
I went off of my conversation with management, and that is what they suggested to me. So that is probably a better question for (Howson).
In other words, his request was based on a full build (so much for the "reshaping" euphemism Jackets PR has worked so hard to sell). And, again, we're talking about a multi-year rebuild.
So, based on the timeframe both men gave us, you have to ask if John P. McConnell was being less than honest in the days proceeding the protest when he stated:
"Every option you can think of is being considered. When the ‘nuclear’ option is mentioned, I cringe less now than I did two months ago. That doesn’t mean that’s what we’re going to do, but it certainly becomes a more realistic choice."
The choice would seem to have already been made and communicated to the Captain. The only souls that didn't get the news were the fans. Instead, fans were treated to a dog and pony show about the All Star Game for the following season...all while the team's most recent All Star was already on his way out the door. And you can be sure in the coming months that shiny little bobble is their last stand to distract you from whatever other bad news they don't feel like sharing with you--such as the honest truth about exactly how long they anticipate the rebuild to take...while they likely increase your ticket prices again.
Color me unimpressed now, a month later, when Mr. Howson states with regards to why he suddenly must state Nash asked them to consider trading him:
“I just think it was the right thing to do,” Howson said. “It was the truthful thing to do.”
Since we're being honest with one another now Scott (Nash's trade value be damned!), tell me, how long is this rebuild of your's going to take and why should we trust you and Priest to get it right this time?
I think we can all agree now that JPM was right when he said "To me, I think everybody in the organization has a little bit of blame." Yes, yes you are more than we knew then. Now make it right. Those responsible should be held accountable.
MacJr. has no intention of holding Priest responsible for anything because to MacJr,. Priest has no responsibility for the "on Ice" product. Look, the biggest liar here is not Howson, maybe it is Priest, but in all likelihood it is MacJr.
I think it is likely that the plan simply changed once Nash asked to be traded. From a Nash trade you can get what a trade of 2-3 other players (not named Carter) would get you, and it isn't as necessary to get rid of many players. Perhaps Brassard, Umberger, and who knows who else, are a little safer because of Nash putting himself forward as an option. (Yeah, I know that wouldn't please many of you.)
I think it is likely that the plan simply changed once Nash asked to be traded. From a Nash trade you can get what a trade of 2-3 other players (not named Carter) would get you, and it isn't as necessary to get rid of many players. Perhaps Brassard, Umberger, and who knows who else, are a little safer because of Nash putting himself forward as an option. (Yeah, I know that wouldn't please many of you.)
This is kind of what I was thinking. Initially it was blow everything up, keep Nash, compete in 4 years. Nash probably didn't want to wait that long, put himself out to be traded. Management decided that with a Nash trade, they could move on with just some retooling. Basically what Renion said. I think there is much more to the story after this given what Nash's agent said and Howson's "I can not tell a lie" speech. I'm sure more info will slowly trickle out.
So you are rooting for a rebuild by Howson? Are you hoping third time's a charm?
As long as it's Howson we might as well keep Nash until we get a homerun deal. There is always the hope some other team slips and their GM panics and buys high.
I have no hope until we get the leadership at the top that we need.
No, I want Nash, Howson and Priest all gone.
Howson and Priest have seemingly gotten the vote of confidence from ownership already....
No new GM at this point would likely be able to fetch more for Nash than what was offered at the deadline with Howson opening up his mouth and cutting value back by anywhere from 30-50 percent.
I honestly have no problems with Howson trading Nash, as long as Howson and Priest follow Nash out the door.
I don't see a Nash move as something that Howson can really botch at this point, I am, however, not filled with confidence that a rebuild by Howson and Priest will be any different than the past two plans, which is to say, a bunch of half fixes and bandaids.
That this point, with the Apple Dumpling Gang continuing to call the shots, and as much as they've screwed this up already they owe it to:
The Fans
The organization
The city
Rick Nash
In that order, to get this situation resolved very soon.
Last edited by KeithBWhittington: 02-29-2012 at 06:31 AM.
In other words, his request was based on a full build (so much for the "reshaping" euphemism Jackets PR has worked so hard to sell). And, again, we're talking about a multi-year rebuild.
You touched on the same part that I did a few pages back. Something happened in the conversation about team direction that Nash appears to have had taken exception to. What I found interesting is that Nash stated he did what they suggested he do.
Quote:
I went off of my conversation with management, and that is what they suggested to me. So that is probably a better question for (Howson).
Important piece of information there. It implies a back-and-forth in which the front office said "We are doing this, if it doesn't appeal to you, you may want to consider asking for a new home.".
As I said yesterday, this isn't as simple as Nash requesting a trade. We are missing vital pieces of information and Nash, accidentally or intentionally, asked the media to confront Howson (perhaps, didn't watch the conference to see what Nash really said) about it.
It is probably as simple as Nash not liking the "reshaping" plan. It's probably, as you suggest, closer to a full rebuild or "nuclear" option.
Great read from Arace today. I think that he says it all nicely.
Quote:
Instead, all we heard was niceness — from Nash, who spoke in circles; and Howson, who is “reshaping” but not “rebuilding”; and Richards, who has the charisma of drapery; and the Jackets’ players, who are so close, they are in last place.
The fans are the only people who are ticked off, and they will tell you why.
They know a lack of leadership when it pats them, patronizingly, on the back.
No new GM at this point would likely be able to fetch more for Nash than what was offered at the deadline with Howson opening up his mouth and cutting value back by anywhere from 30-50 percent.
30 to 50 percent?
Why not 25 percent or 55 percent? Or 10 percent?
Maybe he actually increased it by 1.5 percent?
If the allegedly rejected Rangers deal = 100 percent, then what exactly would be a deal that is 30 percent less look like?
We don't know exactly how this is going to play out, but I feel confident about a couple of things:
1. There will be more than one team interested in Nash.
2. Columbus isn't going to sell him cheap. It may not be the overpayment most of us hope for, but it'll be a fair deal.
This sky-is-falling, Nash-has-no-value stuff is getting a little silly, particularly if we're going to start trying to quantify something that we can't.
