GDT: Game 11: Columbus Blue Jackets vs. Calgary Flames |2/7 7PM EST FSO|

[InjuredChoker]

Meh. Not a bad game, liked the effort and tying goal at the end. Bobo wasn't bad but didn't have those game savers. JJ struggled a little with Erixon. Liked Calvert.

 

[Jackets16]

Not taking issue with this but rather adding on, if you will. But two things I think about this:

1) What makes a "culture"? Everything about this team, including the owner, has changed since the team was founded (not that long ago in the grand scheme). Seems to be a pretty difficult thing to nail down.

2) Which is why it's going to take some time. I'm assuming JD would have taken a full season before beginning a makeover. He's going to get just over half that. Is that enough? I expect it will be, but the task is not that clear-cut.

Which makes me think of 3) What if Davidson decides that someone who's out of favor (Howson, Richards, Umberger, Mason) is part of the long-term solution moving forward. About whom will we change our tune - JD or the other individual?

Here is my opinion of what culture is. Culture is something that starts from the top of the organization and goes all the way down to the AHL. The top decides how things will be done and what will and will not be allowed. They will settle for nothing less and won't put up with anyone not doing their job.

I don't think you will start to see this change until we start making trades, because I personally think they want to play guys who are playing bad more minutes. I have always thought this while watching the Cavs the last few years. It has always seemed that they try to win the games with the guys they have, but they don't always use the best guys. Does that make sense?

 

[Jackets16]

Totally agree with Edm on Richards. Again I keep saying it but the only reason he has a job is because ownership/management didn't want to pay a big salary to a coach during the lockout. He'll be gone next year, but he's coaching because of the tightwads running the team.
Also next year we better have a #1 goalie. Mason is not the answer and neither is Bob. Now both of those guys are young but they both sucked out loud last season, so whoever decided that two poor options were the solution needs their head examined. it's ok if they keep one of the two next season as a BACKUP but if you can't score goals consistently, and your plan is to build from the net out then you need a legit goalie.
The effort of this team is a bad as it's every been. They play hard for 20 minutes (last night it was the first 20, other times it's int eh middle, other times at end). Yes some of that may be on the coach, but players that want to be good get themselves going. Yes the losing sucks, but let's be honest alot of these guys have only played here 11 games and they already have joined the Circle of Suck or Commitment to Mediocrity. Embararrising for a group with so little talent to not play hard.

Maybe they didn't bring in a top G this year, because they want to get a high draft pick. This was not the year to start winning. We all want to win now, but it is probably best we don't start winning until next year.

 

[Jackets16]

Very good question. You are right we have changed everything - players turnover every season, multiple coaches, 2 GMs, 3 Presidents, 2 owners (JMAC and Jr).

IMO we need a total house cleaning. Start at the top.

President - I think right now we all feel good that JD is the right man in charge.
Coach/Operations - This should be the guys that JD wants from head coach to scouts, to GM, etc. Right now he has largely an inherited staff (in fact did he bring anyone with him)?
Assistant Coaches - Needs to be picked by the New Head Coach - not assigned from above. Let JD pick the next coach (who will have their own system), then that coach picks his own assistants.
Players - This is what will take time. The Coaches need to let the GM know who fits and who doesn't and what type of players they need to win. Maybe we have a lot of peices, maybe we have none. To be honest noone knows until JD selects the coach (who has their system). This may take a long time to clear out and acquire what we need.

Recapping the past. We typically do band aids. Team sucks - so fire the coach in mid-season. Off-season means pretty consistently moving out 5-8 players and bringing in new guys (trades, young guys, free agents). Then repeat (fire coach, bring in new players).
Occasionally replace the GM, or a scout, or a new President.
But if you look at everything except in the Hitchcock years the team had no identity. JD understands that. Point with Hitchcock was he was just the head coach. He couldn't control anything above him (like Mac Jr saying the CBJ will play Hitchcock hockey, then firing him a year or so later when team didn't want to play like that anymore).
Their needs to be a total gutting of this team. Bring in guys that JD wants, not guys that have been here. That goes from the front office to on the ice.

Good post.

 

[bizzz*]

Bob has played for this team only 6 games and some people are already writing him off. That's easy to post that the team needs another goalie, but maybe those posters can provide solution as well? Cause a lot of GMs would have appreciated it. Bunch of the NHL teams are looking for their goalie for years. Philly, Edmonton, Chicago, Tampa, Toronto can't find the one for decades.
Bob is still only 24. Rinne, Crawford, Howard haven't been in the NHL at that age and he is still developing. And he has higher SV% than Quick, Howard, Hiller, Kiprusoff, Mike Smith... Those guys re probably complete bums and should be replaced cause 10 games into the season mean everything.

 

[JacketsDavid]

Bob has played for this team only 6 games and some people are already writing him off. That's easy to post that the team needs another goalie, but maybe they can provide solution as well? Bunch of the NHL teams are looking for their goalie for years. Philly, Edmonton, Chicago, Tampa, Toronto can't find the one for decades.
Bob is still only 24. Rinne, Crawford, Howard haven't been in the NHL at that age and he is still developing. And he has higher SV% than Quick, Howard, Hiller, Kiprusoff, Mike Smith...

Bizzz he stunk last year.
Yes he can develop but he needs to develop as a backup behind a vet.
Let he earn a starting spot, no way did he deserve a starting or co-starting spot.

 

[JacketsDavid]

Maybe they didn't bring in a top G this year, because they want to get a high draft pick. This was not the year to start winning. We all want to win now, but it is probably best we don't start winning until next year.

Could be. Another guess is they thought the season would be lost and they assumed by the time it was time to play hockey that maybe Mason would already be gone?
I never really thought of that until now.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Yes, but with the game on the line, you go with the guys who are producing NOW!

I remember watching an NFL playoff game, and a young receiver had four drops and a fumble. And these weren't drops on a 1st-and-10; they were at critical points in the game, both in terms of down/distance and in terms of time left.

Then, with less than 10 seconds left and the season on the line (and the greatest receiver of all-time on the other side), this happened.

 

[bizzz*]

Bizzz he stunk last year.
Yes he can develop but he needs to develop as a backup behind a vet.
Let he earn a starting spot, no way did he deserve a starting or co-starting spot.

He was great in Nashville and Dallas games, he was great in the KHL this year. He was inconsistent over the very short period of time this season, he wasn't bad. And how he can develop sitting on the bench behind a vet and just watching the games? Young goalies like Lehner and Markstrom are playing in the AHL while older guys are backing up starters for a reason. We just can't send Bob to the AHL.

And who is that vet you would want to see as a starter? As I said at least 10 team would love to find the one, but there's not a lot of them available.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Not taking issue with this but rather adding on, if you will. But two things I think about this:

1) What makes a "culture"? Everything about this team, including the owner, has changed since the team was founded (not that long ago in the grand scheme). Seems to be a pretty difficult thing to nail down.

2) Which is why it's going to take some time. I'm assuming JD would have taken a full season before beginning a makeover. He's going to get just over half that. Is that enough? I expect it will be, but the task is not that clear-cut.

Which makes me think of 3) What if Davidson decides that someone who's out of favor (Howson, Richards, Umberger, Mason) is part of the long-term solution moving forward. About whom will we change our tune - JD or the other individual?

Excellent question, with an answer that may make numerous heads explode.

 

[Jackets16]

Could be. Another guess is they thought the season would be lost and they assumed by the time it was time to play hockey that maybe Mason would already be gone?
I never really thought of that until now.

Possible, but I would like to think they didn't plan for no season. They should have planned for a season and then reacted accordingly.

 

[Doug19]

Since I realize you call everyone you don't like a joke and do it with regularity, I sense that you are have the advantage of being right on occasion. No, I sense there is no disguise in use.

I think I saw something from someone declaring Richards an idiot for not playing Brassard on the PP in the last couple of minutes of the game, I can't say I remember how many minutes Brassard played after that lazy hooking penalty earlier in the period. Anyone remember?

I have been questioning a lot of decisions made by Richards all year long. When the team is losing games it is certainly far easier to second guess him. All I can say is that he is far and away better than Ariel, but I don't think he is the Jackets coach long term.

To the game, this pattern of playing well the first 20, not so much after that, and the 4th line being the main line that can sustain pressure has to end. We also need our goal tenders to give up less questionable goals. They are rarely stealing games, they tend to only keep us in games. We have to play better in front of them, but we need some outstanding games instead of good or decent games.

For sure, you are so right.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Not taking issue with this but rather adding on, if you will. But two things I think about this:

1) What makes a "culture"? Everything about this team, including the owner, has changed since the team was founded (not that long ago in the grand scheme). Seems to be a pretty difficult thing to nail down.

2) Which is why it's going to take some time. I'm assuming JD would have taken a full season before beginning a makeover. He's going to get just over half that. Is that enough? I expect it will be, but the task is not that clear-cut.

Which makes me think of 3) What if Davidson decides that someone who's out of favor (Howson, Richards, Umberger, Mason) is part of the long-term solution moving forward. About whom will we change our tune - JD or the other individual?

Others have had some pretty good responses, but I'll give you mine:

1. What is culture? Let's be more specific. What is a "winning culture"? Well, let's try this on...

A. Accountability from ownership, management, players, and all other parties associated with the Columbus Blue Jackets hockey franchise.
B. Excellence in all levels of the team's operations, on-ice and off, as sports fans and citizens of Central Ohio accept nothing less.
C. A commitment to honor the community and fans of Central Ohio from all of those involved in the Columbus Blue Jackets hockey franchise.
Which means, a winning culture STARTS at the top and then those at the top instill it throughout the entire franchise. When those at the top hold THEMSELVES accountable, it is easier for them to hold those below them accountable and have credibility. If those at the top are not accountable the whole thing falls apart.

2. I don't know why this is assumed. JD is from the St. Louis organization and probably knows this team pretty well. The only reason he hasn't been able to start immediately is because of the timing of his hiring. Reality is that he came in when the off-season was pretty much over (go take a look at the other thread about the number of forwards under contract for NEXT year, let alone this one). His first opportunity to make changes to the roster is as the deadline approaches. There could be one before that, but those moves are fewer and farther between. He wasn't going to fire any of the front office immediately before the season. Just doesn't make a lot of sense. At this point, the day after the season ends is the time any front office moves will be made. Based on the fact he already knows this team well from being in its division, I think half a season is plenty to start making moves.

3. I don't hold John Davidson up as a savior, so I'm not sure my "tune" will change much. I hold Davidson to the same standard I held Scott Howson to. Contrary to what some seem to want to believe, I was far from the first critic of Scott Howson. Some wanted him gone before the Hitchcock firing. I thought it was fair to allow Howson to hire his own coach and see how that played out. He chose Scott Arniel.

I care about results. I care about building a winning culture. I don't see how you build a winning culture by leaving the architect of these past several seasons in a key decision making position. That hardly establishes a culture of accountability. So, I'd question Howson's retention just as I questioned the wisdom of Ken Hitchcock retaining Gerard Gallant's coaching staff.

For all the talk of the constant changes with the Jackets, they've never cleaned house and had a fresh start. As I noted above, Hitchcock (and Howson) retained much of the prior administration's staff in place. We again hired a permanent coach (why not just leave an interim if we were hiring JD?) before we hired a new head of hockey ops. It would be nice to have a well thought out restructuring of the oranization. Yes, I'm sure there are some qualified people who would and should stay on. But if JD is the only change in what is clearly a dysfunctional organization, it starts to smell more like a PR move than a commitment to building a winning team.

There are pieces that Howson will have acquired that will be useful for JD going forward...just as their were useful pieces that Doug MacLean had acquired that Howson was able to use. That alone is not a reason to maintain the status quo.

Now I'm sure someone is going to chime in about how the Cleveland Browns have had X coaches or GMs or whatever and they still suck. You are correct, they still suck. But it isn't because they've fired a series of decision makers, it is because each time they have replaced those decision makers with equally poor alternatives.

There are guys right now who'd be better choices than Scott Howson. Rick Dudley comes to mind. Ron Hextall would be worth considering. If he's fired, George McPhee (BGSU alum) would be a worthy candidate. Heck, why not have Craig Patrick call up his old buddy Ronnie Francis? And for once, with JD at the helm and one of those guys as GM (or any of a number of guys I haven't listed), we'd have some considerable experienced hockey knowledge at the top.

The irony is that some of the same people who celebrated Brian Burke's firing in Toronto are still defending Scott Howson who has had a longer time and arguably a cleaner slate to start from. Yet the team Burke built is fighting for a playoff berth and the one Howson built is yet again mired at the bottom of the standings. Nonetheless, I think Burke earned his firing because this is a performance business and he didn't perform in a reasonable time to develop a team. Howson has had even more leeway than Burke. At some point the rope has to run out.

 

[JacketsDavid]

He was great in Nashville and Dallas games, he was great in the KHL this year. He was inconsistent over the very short period of time this season, he wasn't bad. And how he can develop sitting on the bench behind a vet and just watching the games? Young goalies like Lehner and Markstrom are playing in the AHL while older guys are backing up starters for a reason. We just can't send Bob to the AHL.

And who is that vet you would want to see as a starter? As I said at least 10 team would love to find the one, but there's not a lot of them available.

Just because a guy plays well in a game or two (Mason has done well in a couple games this year too) or even plays well in the AHL doesn't mean you pencil him in as your starter.
Over an entire season last year (as a backup) he was horrible in Philly. I mean statistically he and Mason were among the 5 worst tenders in the game last year.

Our friends at Pittsburgh found a goalie, that is pushing their young goalie this year (wouldn't be surprised to see Fleury only get 26-30 starts). So there were guys out there and available. Maybe not a ton of them, but they were out there.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Others have had some pretty good responses, but I'll give you mine:

I agree and thanks to those posters and to you for your subsequent reply as well.

2. I don't know why this is assumed. JD is from the St. Louis organization and probably knows this team pretty well. The only reason he hasn't been able to start immediately is because of the timing of his hiring. Reality is that he came in when the off-season was pretty much over (go take a look at the other thread about the number of forwards under contract for NEXT year, let alone this one). His first opportunity to make changes to the roster is as the deadline approaches. There could be one before that, but those moves are fewer and farther between. He wasn't going to fire any of the front office immediately before the season. Just doesn't make a lot of sense. At this point, the day after the season ends is the time any front office moves will be made. Based on the fact he already knows this team well from being in its division, I think half a season is plenty to start making moves.

Going to stick with this because I don't have much to comment on regarding the rest of your post - with which I'm either fine or indifferent.

But if we go with the definition of culture as provided by the handful of posters who've weighed in here, simply being ready to make some moves isn't the same as creating/instilling/manifesting a culture. It's a part of it. Sure, we could see some trades made, with an eye toward excising players who are not part of the plan moving forward and adding pieces that are or could be. I wager we could see a head coach fired - at least I won't rule it out.

But the larger "plan" of a cultural makeover is going to take time. IMO there's no way around it.

 

[EDM]

Why don't we wait to see what the facts are concerning question three before creating another non-existent controversy? To start hypothesizing about a matter months before it would occur, IF IT EVER DOES OCCUR, is far more than just silly.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Why don't we wait to see what the facts are concerning question three before creating another non-existent controversy? To start hypothesizing about a matter months before it would occur, IF IT EVER DOES OCCUR, is far more than just silly.

Me and Porty, creating drama, pushing agendas...

I believe that will be interesting as it plays out. It appears you don't. That's cool.

 

[CapnCornelius]

But if we go with the definition of culture as provided by the handful of posters who've weighed in here, simply being ready to make some moves isn't the same as creating/instilling/manifesting a culture. It's a part of it. Sure, we could see some trades made, with an eye toward excising players who are not part of the plan moving forward and adding pieces that are or could be. I wager we could see a head coach fired - at least I won't rule it out.

But the larger "plan" of a cultural makeover is going to take time. IMO there's no way around it.

Building a culture takes time. Building the foundations of a culture has to happen sooner than later or the opportunity to build a culture is lost because the remnants of the old culture still are polluting the process. This may well be Howson's downfall as much as anything else. Remember the inept way the replacing of the scouts was handled over the course of YEARS rather than making a change and starting fresh from Day 1 (or at least Day 1 of Howson's first off-season) and then replacing a couple guys if they didn't work out as time went on.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Building a culture takes time. Building the foundations of a culture has to happen sooner

Then we are saying the same thing.

 

[blahblah]

How? I see the same dumb decisions Arniel made, with the same result, losing! Did you hear the presser when Porty asked about Brassard on the bench at the end of the game? If that wasn't an Arniel answer I don't know what was! To me we just have an Arniel clone behind the bench.

I can't give you the Paul Harvey tagline and give you the rest of the story, actually I just won't. To be honest it isn't that interesting. I didn't see the presser, but I'm not looking for anything insightful from it. You are rarely going to get a straight answer.

Richards is light years ago of Arniel. That is not to say that Richards is good, that is just how godawful Arniel was.

 

[Zoo16]

I think this sums up the OT fairly well:

 

[Crede777]

I expect Howson to remain after Davidson makes his decisions.

This is because I get the sense that ownership and Davidson view Howson like this:
1. He's not particularly knowledgable about the game of hockey.
2. He's very good at the paperwork aspect of being a GM with regards to salary and contract negotiation.
3. He's a smart guy who understands that his knowledge about hockey is lacking.

I think they will take that -- a guy who doesn't know much about hockey but is good at doing the technical aspects of managing a team and is open to learning.

The problem is, as fans, we don't want to have to sit through the growing pains of "learning." This is a professional sports team. We expect a GM and coach who already "know." Let him and the others "learn" somwhere else. We pay to watch the on-ice product. Like a show, if they're still working the kinks out we shouldn't have to pay.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I expect Howson to remain after Davidson makes his decisions.

This is because I get the sense that ownership and Davidson view Howson like this:
1. He's not particularly knowledgable about the game of hockey.
2. He's very good at the paperwork aspect of being a GM with regards to salary and contract negotiation.
3. He's a smart guy who understands that his knowledge about hockey is lacking.

I think they will take that -- a guy who doesn't know much about hockey but is good at doing the technical aspects of managing a team and is open to learning.

The problem is, as fans, we don't want to have to sit through the growing pains of "learning." This is a professional sports team. We expect a GM and coach who already "know." Let him and the others "learn" somwhere else. We pay to watch the on-ice product. Like a show, if they're still working the kinks out we shouldn't have to pay.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=2383

GM - Cape Breton Oilers - 1994-95 to 1999-00
Assistant GM - Edmonton Oilers - 2000-01 to 2006-07

Nah, he knows nothing about hockey.

 

[candyman82]

I expect Howson to remain after Davidson makes his decisions.

This is because I get the sense that ownership and Davidson view Howson like this:
1. He's not particularly knowledgable about the game of hockey.
2. He's very good at the paperwork aspect of being a GM with regards to salary and contract negotiation.
3. He's a smart guy who understands that his knowledge about hockey is lacking.

I think they will take that -- a guy who doesn't know much about hockey but is good at doing the technical aspects of managing a team and is open to learning.

The problem is, as fans, we don't want to have to sit through the growing pains of "learning." This is a professional sports team. We expect a GM and coach who already "know." Let him and the others "learn" somwhere else. We pay to watch the on-ice product. Like a show, if they're still working the kinks out we shouldn't have to pay.

You do realize that he played professional hockey and has basically spent his entire life around the game.

 

[Crede777]

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=2383

GM - Cape Breton Oilers - 1994-95 to 1999-00
Assistant GM - Edmonton Oilers - 2000-01 to 2006-07

Nah, he knows nothing about hockey.

I know he played hockey. That doesnt mean he knows a lot about it, especially compared to other, more successful GM's.

How else do you explain Portzline's explanation that Davidson is the hockey side and Howson is the management side? Because that almost certainly is the case. JD is hockey and Howson is the lawyer.