HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Measuring Success

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-12-2012, 05:38 PM
  #1
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Measuring Success

How do you measure the success of a team?

I am not trying to light another fire as to whether or not there needs to be changes in the front office, the team, the coaching staff, or anything else. Just trying to get a handle on expectations.

If next year (regardless of leadership) The Blue Jackets have 85 pts and finish 11-12, is that success? It is improvement. If they get in the playoffs is that a success? If they make the playoffs every other year how would that rate? What if they make the playoffs every year but don't get to the finals?

If the organization replaces the front office and everyone gets fired and a "new group" takes over, how long do they have to become successful? How long do they have to make the playoffs? How long do they have to win a playoff series? Two series? The Stanley Cup?

Just trying to quantify what expectations of success are?

Roadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 05:52 PM
  #2
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Blue Jacket's Curse
 
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 12,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
How do you measure the success of a team?
by height

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 06:02 PM
  #3
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KallioWeHardlyKnewYe View Post
by height
Atkinson will never get anywhere then

Roadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 06:23 PM
  #4
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,925
vCash: 500
Right now, making the playoffs is considered success. Anything short of the playoffs is a failure

BluejacketNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 06:37 PM
  #5
DaveCBJ
Boom. Outta here.
 
DaveCBJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 190
vCash: 500
Success in sports is a process, not an event. You measure success based on your goal.

If the CBJ step into training camp with the objective to "show improvement" from last year, than your example would be considered a success. I think most of us would agree that a goal like that should get everyone fired immediately!

Success in the NHL, for many, means one thing: hoisting the Stanley Cup.

But good goals must be reasonable and attainable. Obviously, the CBJ will not win the Stanley Cup next year. So a good goal for them is to win their first playoff series - and winning their first playoff series would
be a great start. Once we get to the playoffs and win games, we can shift our goals to include hoisting the Cup.

DaveCBJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 07:34 PM
  #6
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
To me, Success in the NHL is building a team that gives you a reasonable shot every year at making the conference finals and occasionally further.

It is reasonable to give management and players two seasons to climb back into contention from disaster. Success takes bold and often risky action. And success also needs cornerstones to hold the fort together once success has been achieved (the Deetroits for example).

The Jackets have exhibited none of the above. They have been playing chess with the franchise instead of going to war.

JACKETfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:08 PM
  #7
Speedy Sanderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 380
vCash: 500
I'm realistic, 100 points is not happening next season. I do think it's not unreasonable to expect meaningful games to be played in March and April. There's nothing worse than being out of it before the New Year. If the Jackets sniff 85-90 points and some of the young guys like Atkinson, Moore and Johansen are showing progress, I'll be ok. Playoffs must happen the following season if we don't make it next year.

Speedy Sanderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:10 PM
  #8
Fred Glover
Chief of Sinners
 
Fred Glover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ohio
Country: Scotland
Posts: 4,105
vCash: 6400
Success in pro sports is winning. This is not something we are used to, so our team this year would not be labeled a success.

Successful teams win games. Successful organizations win championships. We are short on both ends

Fred Glover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:19 PM
  #9
Jaxs
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Jaxs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,154
vCash: 500
Too bad we have taken a left turn at this crossroads in most sesaons.

To wait another year and have a wait and see mentality, is a recipe for more failure, yes JPM, I'm talking to you.

Jaxs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:30 PM
  #10
Dednimnepo
Winning is the Fun
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 343
vCash: 500
Regular season success: Make the post season.
Post season success: Win your first series and/or end better or equal to your seed.

To be in contention for the post season you need to be on target for 90+ points. So leaving your team room for a late season push you can say
20 games in you need at least 20 points
41 games in you need 45 points
62 games in you need 70 points
and
Any stretch of 10 games that you make less than a point per game is bad.

Next year I suspect the Blue Jackets will end up below 90 points. That is a failure but possibly tolerated if the team is trending upward. If I ignore my desire for winning now and assume next year is another lost year I want these things for a brighter future.
1. A coach ending the season with 60 games and contracted for 2013/14.
2. Fundamentally better hockey in the last 30 games than the first 30 games.
3. Youth and young star improvement throughout the year.
4. Minimal major contract busts.
5. No gaping holes in the positions, just areas that need adjustment.

If I'm gonna watch losses, I watch pretty much whatever the Blue Jackets put on the ice, I'd rather watch scrubs and youth lose playing with heart than watch talent lose because they're comfortable with losing.

Dednimnepo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:33 PM
  #11
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KallioWeHardlyKnewYe View Post
by height
Somehow I think that's not the dimension CBJCougar would have chosen!

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:35 PM
  #12
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
How do you measure the success of a team?

I am not trying to light another fire as to whether or not there needs to be changes in the front office, the team, the coaching staff, or anything else. Just trying to get a handle on expectations.

If next year (regardless of leadership) The Blue Jackets have 85 pts and finish 11-12, is that success? It is improvement. If they get in the playoffs is that a success? If they make the playoffs every other year how would that rate? What if they make the playoffs every year but don't get to the finals?

If the organization replaces the front office and everyone gets fired and a "new group" takes over, how long do they have to become successful? How long do they have to make the playoffs? How long do they have to win a playoff series? Two series? The Stanley Cup?

Just trying to quantify what expectations of success are?
Not trying to be a smartass (anymore than usual anyway), but what make sports great is they have two things that measure success. Scoreboards and standings. Just win baby! To be more specific, being in playoff contention past Christmas would be nice for a change.


Last edited by leesmith: 04-12-2012 at 09:06 PM.
leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 08:48 PM
  #13
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,938
vCash: 500
Playoffs at a minimum. More than 50% of NHL teams make them. It is a low bar.

Once you consistently make the playoffs the bar is raised. But now it is the playoffs.

CapnCornelius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 09:48 PM
  #14
Nanabijou
Drop the puck
 
Nanabijou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,620
vCash: 500
I said last summer that my measure of success for this year would be to win at least one playoff game at Nationwide. I thought that was an attainable initial goal considering the two preceding disaster seasons.

Instead we had even a bigger disaster of a season which is why I'm on board for a house-cleaning.

I can't really comment on what my expectations are for next year until I get a better idea if we are really rebuilding or just kind of subtly 're-shaping'. I really am not sure what the CBJ plan is right now.

Nanabijou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 09:59 PM
  #15
Paisano*
Jury is still out...
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 1,384
vCash: 500
Success can't come all at once it has to be taken in steps, one step at a time. Right now we lay flat on our face at the bottom of the stairs!

Paisano* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-12-2012, 10:24 PM
  #16
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBum View Post
Success can't come all at once it has to be taken in steps, one step at a time. Right now we lay flat on our face at the bottom of the stairs!
and try not to drown in our own slobber.

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 12:29 AM
  #17
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,694
vCash: 500
I have one question.

In a forum where I lurk and post, and where Capn lurks and posts, and Blahblah lurks and posts, why would you start a topic whose title is an open-ended question?

I'll give something that I think was successful this year. A lot of the younger players came in under trying circumstances, performed, and didn't buckle under the pressure or get beaten down by the weight of the season. A few years ago, going through the one unsuccessful season of my football life, it was a struggle. It was not easy or fun to drag myself out there every day and try to teach and guide kids who were becoming just as miserable with each ensuing failure.

So there's certainly a big positive for Johansen, Moore, Savard, York, and Atkinson getting a chance to show what they can do, both while there was still a chance to have success but also long after that had passed.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 09:06 AM
  #18
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
I have one question.

In a forum where I lurk and post, and where Capn lurks and posts, and Blahblah lurks and posts, why would you start a topic whose title is an open-ended question?
Because I can. There is no room for the faint of heart here.

Ok, it seems we can all agree that winning is the measure of success. Now there's a real shocker. A few did manage to quantify to some degree with the playoffs seeming to be the initial benchmark with the Cup the ultimate objective.

But very few have balanced the equation with an expected term. How long to you give to a mgmt team, coach or roster to reach the specified benchmark? 2 years was one suggestion, from the bottom to the playoffs. I think on another thread I read 5 years to being consistently competitive (read playoffs).

Lets say, just for the sake of discussion, that the front end is blown up as the majority here would prefer. A new President and GM are hired and they re-do the whole mgmt team, staff, and roster. How long do they have to reach the established benchmark of the playoffs? How long before a Cup is required?

If your going to hold someone accountable then the standards to which you are going to hold them need to be defined.

Roadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 11:30 AM
  #19
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
Because I can. There is no room for the faint of heart here.

Ok, it seems we can all agree that winning is the measure of success. Now there's a real shocker. A few did manage to quantify to some degree with the playoffs seeming to be the initial benchmark with the Cup the ultimate objective.

But very few have balanced the equation with an expected term. How long to you give to a mgmt team, coach or roster to reach the specified benchmark? 2 years was one suggestion, from the bottom to the playoffs. I think on another thread I read 5 years to being consistently competitive (read playoffs).

Lets say, just for the sake of discussion, that the front end is blown up as the majority here would prefer. A new President and GM are hired and they re-do the whole mgmt team, staff, and roster. How long do they have to reach the established benchmark of the playoffs? How long before a Cup is required?

If your going to hold someone accountable then the standards to which you are going to hold them need to be defined.
I think it depends entirely on the situation and other important variables. Nothing is in a vacuum.

I'll use the example of the Pittsburgh Pirates. They not only have had a lot of losing seasons in a row, but they're usually 15 games out by the All-Star break. They've hit 75 wins once since 2000. When Neal Huntington took over as GM after the 2007 season, he had few prospects and very little at the MLB level that was worth anything. So he and his staff went through and identified players who would have trade value who were not still improving, and immediately started shipping off everyone who fell outside of that. Incoming were prospects who might not end up as all-stars, but who stood a better chance than someone who was 31 and no better than league average.

Baseball has a slower development cycle, and so it takes longer for the effects of players-for-prospects to be noticed. I'd argue that, despite the Pirates' record being no better than it was when Huntington took over, the team's future looks substantially brighter than it did. There's a fairly young roster at the MLB level, with a slightly older pitching staff. But it takes time, and a lot of it, to both replenish a non-existent farm system and also improve the MLB roster.

Compare that to the Yankees or Red Sox. When the roster is absolutely loaded, the team can compete in free agency, and you're always looking to buy, a build can be a very short-term proposition indeed. Each sport has a short list of teams that can attract whoever they want...MLB has the Yankees, Cubs, and Dodgers. The NFL has the Steelers and Cowboys. The NHL has Toronto, Montreal, and Detroit. Those are the only teams who can actually poach whoever they want from other teams, even if success has been established.

If a new regime took over in Los Angeles, they should be contending within a year based on what their roster and farm system have. But Los Angeles of 2012 is not Columbus of 2007.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 11:58 AM
  #20
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,768
vCash: 500
If this management team returns, against all logic, it's playoff or bust. New management, they get one year, then playoffs or bust. No more Mr. Niceguy!

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 12:04 PM
  #21
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete goegan View Post
No more Mr. Niceguy!
...he's obsce-e-e-ene.

__________________
"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
04-13-2012, 12:17 PM
  #22
Nordique
Registered User
 
Nordique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,167
vCash: 500
Post season play is the goal right now. Thats more than just making the playoff next season. To me it means consistently being in the playoffs, and if you occasionally miss the playoffs, you are at least in the running through late March.

It involves building a team that is competitive and sustainable (good prospects in the system).

Nordique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 12:59 PM
  #23
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,518
vCash: 500
Cup contender is the success. Winning the Cup is the reward for a successful franchise. Moving to top 4 in the conference on a yearly basis is what defines you as a Cup contender, at least top four in most years.

Making the playoffs is part of the building process but isn't something that would define your franchise as successful. The fact that Howson stood pat in our one playoff year, and actually took away from the locker room as opposed to adding, speaks volumes to me about his belief in this franchise.

Developing young players isn't a measure for success anymore than Nash scoring 40 goals from a franchise perspective. It can lead to success but isn't a measure of it. Wins and long playoff runs are how you measure success.

Unless you win the Cup, there should be no celebration the day after you are eliminated. There are some franchises that won't tolerate first round exits. Hell there are some that won't tolerate slow starts. Acceptance of our plight is the first problem. Bemoaning injuries and suspensions are excuses. Once the players hear you using them, you've planted the seed that failure is acceptable. A team like the Pens can lose super stars for months and still win. We lose a someone who isn't even a star for an eight game suspension and we're done.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 03:54 PM
  #24
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
...he's obsce-e-e-ene.
Nice...Guy.

I was trying to think of the next line for the past hour!

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 04:03 PM
  #25
Derby
Pilsners in Prague
 
Derby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete goegan View Post
Nice...Guy.

I was trying to think of the next line for the past hour!
Googled the lyrics. I was correct all those years.


Last edited by Derby: 04-13-2012 at 04:09 PM. Reason: googled, confirmed
Derby 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 02:33 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.