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

What have the Wild and the Preds done differently?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-22-2009, 11:04 PM
  #1
CrazyCanucks
Registered User
 
CrazyCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: India
Posts: 2,079
vCash: 500
What have the Wild and the Preds done differently?

What have each of those 2 teams done differently compared to the BJ's? Why are both of them able to play thier own young players and thrive and make the playoffs multiple times each.

It seems like the BJ's are still an expansion team compared to the other 2. What happened?

I am in awe of the downslide they had down the strech last year going 4-11 and now 2-15.
Do they need to get griitier players that will get down and dirty, like the Preds and Wild? Do they need vetern leadership? A go getter GM? A younger coach that understands the new NHL?


Last edited by CrazyCanucks: 12-22-2009 at 11:11 PM.
CrazyCanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2009, 11:23 PM
  #2
ClevelandJacketFan
Awesome Mascots!
 
ClevelandJacketFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: ...Really?
Country: United States
Posts: 3,207
vCash: 500
Defense. Consistency. Coaching.

ClevelandJacketFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2009, 11:30 PM
  #3
Matthew
F.A.R.T on Mike Todd
 
Matthew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,306
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Matthew
They didn't have Doug Maclean as their GM.

I hate when people do this but I'm going to do it here...

/thread

Matthew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2009, 11:42 PM
  #4
Happy Pony
Registered User
 
Happy Pony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 2,659
vCash: 500
Defensive talent and consistency behind the bench.

Happy Pony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2009, 11:56 PM
  #5
Hilliardsw55
Johnson!
 
Hilliardsw55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 4,870
vCash: 500
They have had NHL rosters that didn't fully consist of young players that will never amount to anything or old washed up has beens.

Hilliardsw55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 12:05 AM
  #6
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,404
vCash: 500
They drafted better. They built through the draft instead of trying to expedite the process. They had solid consistent management. They kept the same coaching staffs in place and built a program.

Columbus tried to expedite through magic trades and free agent signings, Coaching has been a game of musical chairs, management hasn't been anywhere near as competent as those teams.

As long as we're on the subject, what happened to the Canucks? Why haven't they succeeded? Please tell us what's different about the Canucks vs. Calgary and Edmonton? What have each of those 2 teams done differently compared to the Canucks?

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 03:14 AM
  #7
Doug19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: Aland Islands
Posts: 6,138
vCash: 50
It starts and ends with defense

Doug19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 06:15 AM
  #8
Skraut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Enter city here
Posts: 10,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Mike View Post
Defensive talent and consistency behind the bench.
But I thought we needed to fire the Coach!!!!!!

Skraut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 06:48 AM
  #9
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,847
vCash: 500
Neither have had Doug Maclean, Gerard Gallant, or Ken Hitchcock as coaches

BluejacketNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 06:58 AM
  #10
OnYourIgnoreList
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,258
vCash: 500
Both organizations have had a stable front office and coaching staff. I don't think that's a coincidence.

The CBJ's two biggest mistakes were getting rid of King and the 2003 draft. Drafting in general has been a problem, but 2003 lurks as the best of the worst.

That's not to blame Zherdev, but to point the finger at a massive failure in our scouting and concept for the future of the team. I would argue that even if you had Zherdev as the BPA at our draft position, taking a Russian winger who may or may not have been able to even get out of Russia in the first place was a HUGE GIGANTIC mistake. In order of importance, good hockey teams need a goaltending, defense, a true first-line center. We had absolutely no centers in the org that were worth anything, and yet we took a wing whose future was sketchy at best, rather than the best C we could find (or D).

Drafting BPA is great if you aren't hurting for players at various positions but when you're thin in two of the three critical areas, that's where you HAVE to go, even if it's a gamble.

Centers we could have had via the draft in 2003:
Jeff Carter
Zach Parise
Ryan Getzlaf
Mike Richards

Think about this team right now if we had Richards, Brassard and Vermette down the middle.

*ETA* Although in retrospect, if we had one of those guys, we may not have taken Brassard and almost certainly wouldn't have traded to get Vermette. But I still think one of those four on the top line would have a big effect on things today.


Last edited by OnYourIgnoreList: 12-23-2009 at 07:13 AM.
OnYourIgnoreList is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 07:04 AM
  #11
gocbj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 334
vCash: 500
More than anyone will admit, a lot of the problem has been / is mental. And I am not just reaching that conclusion because I am out of original thoughts. It's true. I know the Psychologist who worked for CBJ for about 5 years. This guy all but invented / discovered (whatever happens in the field) sports psychology for children. He has worked with hundreds of athletes, and was the shrink for OSU and the USA olympic team too. He knows his stuff.

Young people are more mentally fragile than older people. These are kids who have been stars their entire life. They are also kids (hockey players) who have been told to supress emotion on the ice their entire life. While I am a fan of hockey for "shut your mouth and just play", it is not natural to play sports with very limited emotion. Wouldn't you sincerely appreciate Nash skating towards the goal following a 5 - 1 loss, and instead of giving Mason a helmet kiss, how about spending a few seconds busting your stick over the goal cross bar! To me, that's why Ovechkin plays so well - he is mentally very stable and comfortable in his own skin. He lets emotion flow, and plays 110% faster than most because of that. Sure, he is skilled too, but emotions bring out even more. Watch CBJ (or any team) play literally 120% faster when we are down a goal with an empty net and 35 seconds left.

There is a big difference between a 23 and 24 year old. Or, between a 20 and 24 year old. Fragile superstars get very high and very low very fast. Our fans are very high and low, and the players feel that. Add a coach who makes them do more unnatural things (Defense first), and we are dead.

We need Hitch's structure, but not his constraint.

We are still the youngest and most immature team in the league. We do not know how to win in the NHL. Our old guys are not the stars. Nash gets mugged every game.

Hitch needs to go or change his ways a bit. Unlike Howsen said, we do need an enforcer. Beyond nostalgia, Shelley coming back would do a lot for this team.

gocbj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 07:55 AM
  #12
DJAnimosity
the ol knifey moloko
 
DJAnimosity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Beyond the Infinite
Country: Wales
Posts: 12,893
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to DJAnimosity
The Wild won the coin flip to pick first in the expansion draft.

/thread

DJAnimosity is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 08:20 AM
  #13
arn29
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 18
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJAnimosity View Post
The Wild won the coin flip to pick first in the expansion draft.

/thread
We picked first. Grabbed Rick Tabaracci from Colorado.

Fun fact: We could have had Nabokov, but we accepted Jan Calhoun and a 9th round draft pick from San Jose instead.

arn29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 08:54 AM
  #14
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gocbj View Post
. Our fans are very high and low, and the players feel that.

We need Hitch's structure, but not his constraint.

We are still the youngest and most immature team in the league. We do not know how to win in the NHL.

Hitch needs to go or change his ways a bit. Unlike Howsen said, we do need an enforcer.

If the fans are high and low its because we've been teased with progress only to see it disappear virtually overnight or had to suffer through a GM and his policies that everyone could see had run their course two years before he was fired.

Agree with point number two, I know its basically the same thing some posters have been saying, but its clear and straight to the point.

We are the youngest (give or take) I'm not sure I'd rate us as the most immature, maybe you are basing strictly on a certain goaltender on this team?

I agree Hitch needs to alter his methods a bit, he won't, but i feel it may go a long way towards disfusing some of the animosity a lot of his critics direct at him, that he doesn't adapt, and with the fact that he hasn't won consistently since before the lockout shows he either lacks the reasoning or the ability to adapt, Hitch isn't an idiot, His pride on the other hand....

One thing I agree with that Howson contends is that we don't need an enforcer.... You pay Boll and Dorsett to play a physical game, both guys can hold their own in fights. Enforcers are a luxury that teams with lots skill can cover up for, they are goods on team that have a solid identity, not one that is defined by the Enforcer. They don't need to pay a guy to play 3 to 4 mins a night to fight then go to the box.

KeithBWhittington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 09:09 AM
  #15
DJAnimosity
the ol knifey moloko
 
DJAnimosity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Beyond the Infinite
Country: Wales
Posts: 12,893
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to DJAnimosity
Quote:
Originally Posted by arn29 View Post
We picked first. Grabbed Rick Tabaracci from Colorado.

Fun fact: We could have had Nabokov, but we accepted Jan Calhoun and a 9th round draft pick from San Jose instead.
Ahhh, you're right. I was confusing that with them picking before us in the actual draft.

The fact that an expansion team picked FOURTH in their first draft tells you all you need to know about the NHL.

DJAnimosity is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 09:38 AM
  #16
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,307
vCash: 500
This thread is funny. "The Wild and Preds have had consistency in management and behind the bench." "We need to fire Hitch!" LOL

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 09:45 AM
  #17
Jaxs
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Jaxs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,083
vCash: 500
It's as easy as 1 2 3.

1.They drafted better.

2.Their coaches had a better plan.

3.They won more games.

Jaxs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 10:03 AM
  #18
Handyy
Registered User
 
Handyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Jyvaskyla, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arn29 View Post
Fun fact: We could have had Nabokov, but we accepted Jan Calhoun and a 9th round draft pick from San Jose instead.
I wouldn't consider that to be a fun fact

Handyy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 10:08 AM
  #19
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arn29 View Post
We picked first. Grabbed Rick Tabaracci from Colorado.

Fun fact: We could have had Nabokov, but we accepted Jan Calhoun and a 9th round draft pick from San Jose instead.
we didn't NEED Nabokov. We had Marc Denis!

leesmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 10:39 AM
  #20
dru
Jarmo Unchained
 
dru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: CBUS
Country: United States
Posts: 6,389
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dru
I got a little bored this morning so I threw together a table with all 3 teams first round draft picks:

YearColumbus Blue JacketsMinnesota WildNashville Predators
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998----------------------------------------------------------David Legwand (C)
1999----------------------------------------------------------Brian Finley (G)
2000Rostislav Klesla (D)Marian Gaborik (LW)Scott Hartnell (LW)
2001Pascal Leclaire (G)Mikko Koivu (C)Dan Hamhuis (D)
2002Rick Nash (LW/RW)Pierre-Marc Bouchard (C)Scottie Upshall (RW)
2003Nikolai Zherdev (RW)Brent Burns (D)Ryan Suter (D)
2004Alexandre Picard (LW)A. J. Thelen (D)Alexander Radulov (RW)
2005Gilbert Brule (C)Benoît Pouliot (LW)Ryan Parent (D)
2006Derick Brassard (C)James Sheppard (C)Jonathon Blum (D)
2007Jake Voracek (RW)Colton Gillies (C)Colin Wilson (C)
2008Nikita Filatov(LW)Tyler Cuma (D)Chet Pickard (G)
2009John Moore (D)Nick Leddy (D)Ryan Ellis (D)


I think the thing that stands out the most to me is the amount of defensemen taken by both Nashville and Minnesota compared to the Blue Jackets. I'm not sure if that has a lot to do with draft position or what but I feel like the only clear cut year where we had the best draft was in 2002 when we had the #1 overall pick. If you look at the other 2 team's draft strategies it tends to focus on defense, centers, and goaltenders. We have drafted 5 wingers in the first round—the same amount as both teams combined. What's been the biggest problem with this team forever? No true #1 center and no true top pairing defensemen.

I think that it's clear Doug MacLean was a horrible drafting GM who should have listened more to his scouts and less to his son. Brule became Torres, Zherdev became Tyutin, Leclaire became Vermette, and our other 2008 first rounder became RJ Umberger in an effort to fix the holes Doug created. And that's just the first rounders, there isn't a whole lot of talent from any of Doug's late round picks outside of Steve Mason and Kris Russell. When I think about how we could have drafted guys like Getzlaf, Parise, Kopitar, or Phaneuf but passed for smaller, less talented guys it makes my blood boil.


Last edited by dru: 12-23-2009 at 10:49 AM.
dru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 10:47 AM
  #21
EDM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,898
vCash: 500
I think the biggest difference is the quality of the ownership groups. JMac for all his good intentions had no idea what it took to run a hockey team. He gave the reins to Doug Maclean which no checks and balances for seven years and let him run the franchise into the ground. The post-JMac ownership group is not as naive as JMac but that is about the only improvement. Priest is an MBA kind of guy with no feel for the hockey game. JMac Jr. is still waiting for us to best the Michigan Blue Devils.

EDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 11:16 AM
  #22
CrazyCanucks
Registered User
 
CrazyCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: India
Posts: 2,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leek View Post
They drafted better. They built through the draft instead of trying to expedite the process. They had solid consistent management. They kept the same coaching staffs in place and built a program.

Columbus tried to expedite through magic trades and free agent signings, Coaching has been a game of musical chairs, management hasn't been anywhere near as competent as those teams.

As long as we're on the subject, what happened to the Canucks? Why haven't they succeeded? Please tell us what's different about the Canucks vs. Calgary and Edmonton? What have each of those 2 teams done differently compared to the Canucks?
The Canucks have just sucked in the late 70's to late 80's. They have the pro record of being below .500 for 15 years straight. Being 2-15 in teh last 17 is nothing compared to that.

Those other 2 teams have drafted hall of fame players and beat up on the Canucks in the 80's n the reg season and the playoffs in teh old system. Whoever won the Smythe Division would end up in the Finals from 82-90. They have drafted good players, made some good trades, had some good coaches since the start of the 90's, but there always has been 1 piece missing. The team of teh early 00's had everything but the goalie. Now we have the goalie, but now something else is missing. They are called Canuckheads for a reason.

CrazyCanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 11:32 AM
  #23
Ar-too
Registered User
 
Ar-too's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 10,140
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ar-too
Quote:
Originally Posted by IAMthespoon View Post
Both organizations have had a stable front office and coaching staff. I don't think that's a coincidence.

The CBJ's two biggest mistakes were getting rid of King and the 2003 draft. Drafting in general has been a problem, but 2003 lurks as the best of the worst.

That's not to blame Zherdev, but to point the finger at a massive failure in our scouting and concept for the future of the team. I would argue that even if you had Zherdev as the BPA at our draft position, taking a Russian winger who may or may not have been able to even get out of Russia in the first place was a HUGE GIGANTIC mistake. In order of importance, good hockey teams need a goaltending, defense, a true first-line center. We had absolutely no centers in the org that were worth anything, and yet we took a wing whose future was sketchy at best, rather than the best C we could find (or D).

Drafting BPA is great if you aren't hurting for players at various positions but when you're thin in two of the three critical areas, that's where you HAVE to go, even if it's a gamble.

Centers we could have had via the draft in 2003:
Jeff Carter
Zach Parise
Ryan Getzlaf
Mike Richards

Think about this team right now if we had Richards, Brassard and Vermette down the middle.

*ETA* Although in retrospect, if we had one of those guys, we may not have taken Brassard and almost certainly wouldn't have traded to get Vermette. But I still think one of those four on the top line would have a big effect on things today.
Doug and Zherdev are my favorite people to have been involved in this organization, and I agree with everything in this post.

The successes of the Wild and the Preds were the most serious items on the dossier against Doug. They've shown that with front office and coaching stability, you can win as an expansion team, and we haven't. Their continued success shows that it's not a fluke, and are now an indictment of Scott Howson and Ken Hitchcock, and by extension now, Mike Priest and the CBJ ownership.

Barry Trotz has never presided over anything like the epic fail that's been the last month of CBJ hockey. The Wild have had rough patches, but nothing like this.

Ar-too is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2009, 11:35 AM
  #24
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ar-too View Post
Barry Trotz has never presided over anything like the epic fail that's been the last month of CBJ hockey. The Wild have had rough patches, but nothing like this.
If you're looking for reinforcement, and counting OTL's as Losses, This team is 8-18 since Novemeber 1st. with 7 of those wins coming in November.

KeithBWhittington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2009, 12:35 PM
  #25
jacketracket*
 
jacketracket*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ... double cream."
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leek View Post
As long as we're on the subject, what happened to the Canucks? Why haven't they succeeded? Please tell us what's different about the Canucks vs. Calgary and Edmonton? What have each of those 2 teams done differently compared to the Canucks?
Would be nice to see an answer from the OP to these questions. The Flames and Oilers have both had success. What have the Canucks been doing wrong?

I think it's telling to realize that we're nine seasons into this thing and the CBJ have yet to have a legitimate top-line center on the roster. The same argument could be made at D (with the exception of Hejda, IMO).

jacketracket* 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 08:15 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.