HFBoards

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

Overall, will the CBJ be better, worse or the same without Rick Nash?

View Poll Results: Will the CBJ be better, worse or the same after Rick Nash
Better 53 66.25%
Worse 10 12.50%
Same 17 21.25%
Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-11-2012, 02:25 PM
  #26
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 Samkow View Post
Because Nash was the biggest part of the team for a decade. And it's not even close.

Not sure why asking if things will be different seems to offend some people. He was the franchise player. His departure is going to affect the franchise in a way that nobody else before him has and few others in the future will.
And if this fanbase wasn't so quick to lynch anyone it thinks of as even slightly negatively affecting the franchise, I wouldn't mind such a discussion. But I don't trust most of the folks here to actually have such an objective discussion.

__________________
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
08-11-2012, 02:45 PM
  #27
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renion View Post
I think they'll be different. I have no idea what that will mean. I'd lean towards "better," but only because I'm feeling better about the team in general.

Also, I'd like to say that this is a legitimate hockey discussion, whether or not it devolves/evolves into a discussion on Nash. I fully support Robert's desire to discuss any hockey topic in a reasonable fashion. If some aren't capable of doing that, and I know some are not, ban them from the thread, not the thread from my eyes. This is a discussion board, after all. Pardon if that sounds abrupt, but I'm getting quite tired of people telling me what I can and cannot read, especially when there is a perfectly good "Ignore this thread" button that I've never used.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 04:17 PM
  #28
ThisIsMyAlibi
Howson = Herminated
 
ThisIsMyAlibi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 535
vCash: 500
There's two ways to look at the OP's question.

Q1. Will removing Nash's presence in the locker room make the team better? Motivation, leadership, etc?
Q2. Will removing Nash's 30 goal production and replacing it with overall decent depth make the team better?

in my opinion,
A1. Probably. This isn't a slight against on Nash's leadership...just some pop psychology. There's no longer a guy to defer to and hope will save the day. Maybe that will force them all to step their games up. Let's hope.
A2. I have no idea. Dubinsky, if healthy, will produce. Anisimov could very likely bust. He DOES have a history of head injuries. The prospect and pick aren't in the equation yet.


We will be better next season. My fear is this improvement will be entirely attributed to Nash being shipped out when in reality...Arniel being gone, Mason having minimal play time, and an improved blueline all matter just as much if not MORE.

ThisIsMyAlibi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 05:15 PM
  #29
CrazyCanucks
Registered User
 
CrazyCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: India
Posts: 2,078
vCash: 500
Real problem was the goalie situation, not Nash, that's why I say same. Why does Mason still have to be in the mix? What is it about teh guy that Howson likes/sees? Time to move on...

CrazyCanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 05:31 PM
  #30
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyCanucks View Post
Real problem was the goalie situation, not Nash, that's why I say same. Why does Mason still have to be in the mix? What is it about teh guy that Howson likes/sees? Time to move on...
I don't think it was goaltending alone, nor do I think it was Nash. I think the problem was a lack of depth at any position. We weren't ready for Steve Mason to collapse again. We weren't ready when goaltenders started getting hurt. We weren't ready for James Wisniewksi's suspension, Grant Clitsome's sheer drop off the planet, or the glut of injuries to our blueline. We weren't ready for Kristian Huselius to miss what equated to the entire season.

The reason I think we're a better team now is because, for the first time ever, we actually have some depth up front and on the blueline. Last year, we were relying on too many "maybes"; whereas this year, we know we don't have an elite player up front, but we also know that we can rely on the guys we have to provide a consistent, hard working blue collar effort. We won't have a 60 point player again, but we won't be hurting nearly as badly should one of our top-6 forwards go down to injury. The Jackets have so many guys who are capable of playing so many different roles, that it's hard for me to see them not being somewhat better. There are literally 11 defensemen who should be able to play some sort of role on the team, especially if there are injuries - we've certainly never said that before. (Johnson, Wisniewski, Tyutin, Nikitin, Moore, Savard, Aucoin, Murray, Goloubef, Holden, Erixon ... maybe even Dalton Prout)

Also, I think our goaltending was addressed to some extent. While I certainly don't think Bobrovsky is the answer that will make us a playoff team, I think he'll at least be substantially better than Mason over the course of the season. Let's not forget, even though his 89.9% save percentage is an eye sore for the Flyers last year, we're talking about a franchise who has struggled desperately to find another Ron Hextall or Bernie Parent. And, their savior Ilya Bryzgalov was a somewhat unflattering 90.9% on the same team. I think he's a serviceable enough guy to get us through the next couple of years ... I can't complain about acquiring him.

Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 05:46 PM
  #31
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,376
vCash: 500
If we are better it has nothing to do with Rick Nash, it's the progress we've made on the roster combined with the new additions.

Overall I think we are a deeper team in which the youth will have to pick up the goal scoring slack. I think that will start to occur and I think overall we will be a better team.

But as I said it has little do with with Nash the player, just the new assets combined with existing assets.

I must admit, I am a bit surprised by the results. The degree mostly.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 09:11 PM
  #32
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I hesitate to vote because I'm convinced this is going to be treated as a referendum on Nash, and I think that's the wrong way to look at it.
I had the same concern initially. Then I thought of it as a referendum on having only one star player that other teams can neutralize with a double-team.

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 09:13 PM
  #33
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,392
vCash: 500
I don't believe for a moment that Nash represented "the problem."

I think trading Nash begins a significant change, but I also believe at its core this is the same organization and thus expect the same operation. For this reason, I voted "same."

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 10:46 PM
  #34
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaketheCannoli View Post
I don't believe for a moment that Nash represented "the problem."

I think trading Nash begins a significant change, but I also believe at its core this is the same organization and thus expect the same operation. For this reason, I voted "same."
Interesting point of view, though I don't fully agree with it. I think we'll have a more competitive group overall. Whether or not that amounts to a better year is moot - but it will make a huge difference in the quality of young players we start to see.

Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 12:39 AM
  #35
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 leesmith View Post
I had the same concern initially. Then I thought of it as a referendum on having only one star player that other teams can neutralize with a double-team.
Oh, I can come up with any number of rationalizations for myself. It's everyone else that I don't trust to be sane or sensible.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 07:59 AM
  #36
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,774
vCash: 500
having read all the comments and thinking about them I think these are the salient points:

1- Time frame has to be considered. The upcoming season I think the team could be marginally better in the standings because there is no place to go but up. Longer term if the kids develop and goal tending is fixed the team has to be better but still needs more offense and better goal tending to be a Cup contender.

2- Not having one star for the other team to focus on is important-just wish the solution had been to add two stars not subtract the one we had

3- The organization is still the same and historically that hasn't been so impressive, but at least there seems to be a plan in place to move forward.

4- It didn't work with Nash-one guy can't be the complete answer. Was he always the problem-no. Was he sometimes- yes.

I voted team will be the same, meaning that long term his being gone should have no real impact-it all depends on what happens with the remaining players and future moves.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 09:41 AM
  #37
Timeless Winter
Oceans of Grey
 
Timeless Winter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 16,006
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Timeless Winter
I couldn't vote better because Steve Mason is still on the roster.

Timeless Winter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 11:58 AM
  #38
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timeless Winter View Post
I couldn't vote better because Steve Mason is still on the roster.



Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 12:24 PM
  #39
cbjfaninmo
I know nut-ting
 
cbjfaninmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lake Ozark, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
Is this Dave King?

cbjfaninmo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 12:50 PM
  #40
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
If we are better it has nothing to do with Rick Nash, it's the progress we've made on the roster combined with the new additions.

Overall I think we are a deeper team in which the youth will have to pick up the goal scoring slack. I think that will start to occur and I think overall we will be a better team.

But as I said it has little do with with Nash the player, just the new assets combined with existing assets.

I must admit, I am a bit surprised by the results. The degree mostly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
Oh, I can come up with any number of rationalizations for myself. It's everyone else that I don't trust to be sane or sensible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
having read all the comments and thinking about them I think these are the salient points:

1- Time frame has to be considered. The upcoming season I think the team could be marginally better in the standings because there is no place to go but up. Longer term if the kids develop and goal tending is fixed the team has to be better but still needs more offense and better goal tending to be a Cup contender.

2- Not having one star for the other team to focus on is important-just wish the solution had been to add two stars not subtract the one we had

3- The organization is still the same and historically that hasn't been so impressive, but at least there seems to be a plan in place to move forward.

4- It didn't work with Nash-one guy can't be the complete answer. Was he always the problem-no. Was he sometimes- yes.

I voted team will be the same, meaning that long term his being gone should have no real impact-it all depends on what happens with the remaining players and future moves.
Thanks to the three of you, nothing further needs to be said by me.

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 02:43 PM
  #41
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbjfaninmo View Post
Is this Dave King?
I'm thinking Pete Goegan IRL

Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 04:39 PM
  #42
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1857 Howitzer View Post
Still not voting. Don't care for the wording. Why can't the question just be will the Jackets be better, worse or the same this season? Why does Nash even have to be part of the question?
Well, here's why you suck then....

Or has this already been brought up?

JACKETfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 04:43 PM
  #43
CalBuckeyeRob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 86
vCash: 500
During his 9 seasons the team averaged 75 points and 196 goals per season. Based on that, I expect they will be about the same or maybe slightly better.

The problem with this analysis, is that Nash was never the problem. The problem was the failure to develop/draft/acquire other top tier talent to go with him. The trade improves the depth of talent but does nothing to add top tier talent to the team. Until that happens the team is going to finish 12-15th in the West.

CalBuckeyeRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 05:15 PM
  #44
Ceff Jarter
Registered Duster
 
Ceff Jarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 499
vCash: 500
Exactly. The problem is drafting and development. With the quality of picks that we have had over the last 10 years, there is no way that teams like Detroit and Chicago should have more fertile prospect pools than us.

So I guess there is no answer to this question. We may have more wins without Nash if AA and Dubi produce like they can, but just because we made the Nash and have a "New Direction" as a franchise doesn't make us better.

Edit: I believe that the firing of our Amateur scouts will have a greater impact on the franchise than the Nash Trade.

Ceff Jarter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 05:55 PM
  #45
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,144
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Travel prevents posting sometimes. Thank you to those who added positively to this discussion... many of the responses where poster predictable but a few folks surprised me. The Jackets will be turning a new page this season, they will be better, book it..

Thank you to Sam for framing it up correctly based on his responses and Wooton for encouraging me to try again..


Last edited by Robert: 08-12-2012 at 06:06 PM.
Robert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 06:31 PM
  #46
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,144
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassť View Post
I'll try, but I still believe your premise is flawed, and don't believe this incarnation of this thread "fixes" what was wrong with the previous one.



Actually it's not relevant, because it's untrue. Nash being on the team did not make it suck more than it was good during his tenure here. And the only bearing his departure will have on the improvement (or lack thereof) of the CBJ moving forward is whether the front office can manage to use the pieces acquired in the trade to construct a better team.

Actually a reincarnation DSL, that pancake was fun at the time, a paddle seems more appropriate these days.

Robert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 07:48 PM
  #47
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbjfaninmo View Post
Is this Dave King?
If he was back in our organization, I certainly would have voted BETTER.

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 08:19 PM
  #48
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I'm thinking Pete Goegan IRL
I'm retired, SL, so I never wear a tie.

pete goegan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 08:54 PM
  #49
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete goegan View Post
I'm retired, SL, so I never wear a tie.
My mistake, sir.

heavy on the sir

Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2012, 09:18 PM
  #50
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
My mistake, sir.

heavy on the sir
aaaaand your ARROW, sirrrrr!



Last edited by leesmith: 08-12-2012 at 09:29 PM.
leesmith 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 08:52 PM.

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.