The best chance for Hitchcock to be hired as a coach now - even he admits this - is during the 2010-11 season, when, inevitably, an NHL team fires its coach after a slow start.
But the Blue Jackets won't wait that long. Priest and Howson have had general discussions about Hitchcock in recent weeks, and they plan to begin hammering out details of his new job when Hitchcock returns to Columbus late this week.
It's a matter they want settled before training camp opens Sept. 17, Howson said. Many are treading lightly on the subject.
"As long as he's under contract with us, we'll find something for him to do that brings value to our organization," Priest said.
But nobody's quite sure what that will entail, though there are at least a handful of possibilities.
"I'll wait for Mike or Scott to come tell me," Hitchcock said. "I have my own plans of what I would like to do, but I don't want to step on anybody's toes or be in the way."
Hitchcock's first passion, of course, is coaching. Recently he's gone on the ice with three junior clubs in British Columbia - Kamloops, Kelowna and Vancouver - to keep his skates soft.
But he won't be on the ice with the Blue Jackets during training camp, and he won't be looking over new Blue Jackets coach Scott Arniel's shoulder.
"Never in a million years would Hitch want to be in a position that in any way affects our new coaching staff," Priest said. "In fact, when both Scott and I have talked to him, that was the first point he made.
"He's been in that position before, replacing another coach, and he knows how awkward that might be."
Is there some kind of coaching position where he just teaches forwards to play well defensively?
I thought the comment below was interesting. First-hand experience is an essential element and shouldn't be overlooked but aspects of the scouting position interact with coaching.
And, I offer "Niitty being Niitty" as my own measure of sarcasm.
Quote:
Many fired NHL coaches have honored their contracts by scouting until another job offer arises, including Hitchcock, who scouted for three weeks with Philadelphia after the Flyers fired him early in the 2006-07 season.
"I enjoyed aspects of it, but it was an unbelievable eye-opener for me on how difficult a scout's life is," Hitchcock said. "I made the comment after only three weeks that every scout should get a raise, just based on the travel alone."
I don't think it's a fiasco or embarrassing. It's a smart move by the NHL to take a stand against these contracts and draw a definitive line in the sand. I couldn't give less of a **** about Kovalchuk and where he ends up.
The Sharks signing Niemi doesn't make sense. They had two legitimate NHL goalies already signed, both of which were as good or almost as good as Niemi. Then they have Stalock in the system still.
Plus it leaves them with no cap space to make any more moves.
The Sharks signing Niemi doesn't make sense. They had two legitimate NHL goalies already signed, both of which were as good or almost as good as Niemi. Then they have Stalock in the system still..
I don't think it's a fiasco or embarrassing. It's a smart move by the NHL to take a stand against these contracts and draw a definitive line in the sand. I couldn't give less of a **** about Kovalchuk and where he ends up.
It's a fiasco because of the vague wording in the CBA regarding cap circumvention and the fact that several other similar contracts have been allowed to stand to this point.
The embarrassment comes from not meeting their self-imposed deadline. While the contract is complicated, I don't believe it's a strong enough excuse to finalize their decision.
Quote:
The Sharks signing Niemi doesn't make sense. They had two legitimate NHL goalies already signed, both of which were as good or almost as good as Niemi. Then they have Stalock in the system still.
Plus it leaves them with no cap space to make any more moves.
It makes a world of sense. Nitty is an arguable starter and Greiss is a giant question mark. Niemi is a legitimate starter, coming off a Stanley Cup run and he was willing to sign for cheap.
They still have around $1M in cap space after the signing with no significant moves to needed before the start of the season. (I don't think the Sharks need another defenseman to remain a threat in the West).
In my world, which isn't always in reality, I kill the whole thing. I don't allow any contract between Kovalchuk or the Devils. If they can't come to an agreement after 3 or 4 tries, then they can't come to a deal that isn't in some way circumventing the salary cap. This whole saga and shenanigans, is it really worth it? The whole situation deviates from the game that is supposed to be the ultimate team sport. The players are going to have continue to have this follow them the whole season if not beyond. He's only going to have the bar raised for himself because of all of this. Take the two away from either other. Everyone else plays by the rules, they clearly cannot.
It's a fiasco because of the vague wording in the CBA regarding cap circumvention and the fact that several other similar contracts have been allowed to stand to this point.
There was absolutely nothing similar to the initial Kovalchuk contract. Nothing whatsoever.
Quote:
The embarrassment comes from not meeting their self-imposed deadline. While the contract is complicated, I don't believe it's a strong enough excuse to finalize their decision.
Both the NHLPA and the NHL had to agree to extend the deadline. So there's obviously something important going on involving both sides that was probably worth extending the deadline.
They haven't not met their deadline yet because it was extended. Until we know why it was extended, there's no reason to judge the NHL or NHLPA for extending the deadline. I doubt they give a **** because a bunch of people on HFBoards are too impatient to wait two days.
Quote:
It makes a world of sense. Nitty is an arguable starter and Greiss is a giant question mark. Niemi is a legitimate starter, coming off a Stanley Cup run and he was willing to sign for cheap.
If they felt that way then they should have never signed Niitty in the first place and went after any one of the plethora of starters available.
Go ask Sharks fans how they feel about this. They're just as confused as I am from what I understand. They feel that Greiss has the potential to be a starter and they already had Niitty signed. This is a pointless signing until they drop someone and if they end up dropping Greiss, I guarantee Sharks fans won't be happy.
Quote:
They still have around $1M in cap space after the signing with no significant moves to needed before the start of the season.
They don't need to make a move, but their defense is horrible as is and the team, as a whole, could use some upgrades (which you need cap space for).
Quote:
(I don't think the Sharks need another defenseman to remain a threat in the West).
I'm pretty sure Sharks fans disagree with you on that one, as do I. No offense.
Seriously, check out this topic about the signing:
There was absolutely nothing similar to the initial Kovalchuk contract. Nothing whatsoever.
The only differences were the length and Kovalchuk's age at the end of the contract.
Quote:
Both the NHLPA and the NHL had to agree to extend the deadline. So there's obviously something important going on involving both sides that was probably worth extending the deadline.
They haven't not met their deadline yet because it was extended. Until we know why it was extended, there's no reason to judge the NHL or NHLPA for extending the deadline. I doubt they give a **** because a bunch of people on HFBoards are too impatient to wait two days.
I don't really think the PA had much of a choice.
I also don't care about where Kovalchuk ends up, but the whole process has been ugly.
Quote:
If they felt that way then they should have never signed Niitty in the first place and went after any one of the plethora of starters available.
Go ask Sharks fans how they feel about this. They're just as confused as I am from what I understand. They feel that Greiss has the potential to be a starter and they already had Niitty signed. This is a pointless signing until they drop someone and if they end up dropping Greiss, I guarantee Sharks fans won't be happy.
Potential only gets you so far. San Jose is in a position to win now and hoping and praying on a tandem of Nitty and Greiss is nearly as awful as hoping and praying on a tandem of Leighton and Boucher. If I was a Sharks fan, I'd feel better about my goaltending situation today than I did yesterday... and clearly I'd be in the minority on HFBoards.
Quote:
They don't need to make a move, but their defense is horrible as is and the team, as a whole, could use some upgrades (which you need cap space for).
I'm pretty sure Sharks fans disagree with you on that one, as do I. No offense.
The only suspect part of the San Jose line up is offense from their defense. It's not stand out defensive core, but it's a lot better than even their own fan base is giving it credit for. I'm in the minority here, too, but I stand firm in my belief that they'll be fine with what they have.
The Sharks' MO seems to be that they do little in the off-season and they just try to get as high as they can until the trade deadline, then they'll make a move. Somewhat of a roundabout way to do things, usually it's the other way around.
