Toggle sidebar

Interesting Info: Part XV (All Jackets-related "tidbits" in here)

Status
Not open for further replies.
KeithBWhittington

KeithBWhittington

Going North
Jun 14, 2003
10,378
0
Brick by Brick
Visit site
Mayor Bee said:
Well, let's see here...

Rookies (by Calder standards) that Hitchcock developed include Gilbert Brule, Alexandre Picard, Marc Methot, Geoff Platt, Ole-Kristian Tollefsen, Curtis Glencross, Tom Sestito, Kris Russell, Jared Boll, Derick Brassard, Nikita Filatov, Steve Mason, Derek Dorsett, and Jakub Voracek. Only Mason, Brassard, and Voracek made anything resembling a meaningful contribution to Columbus, and none were truly high-level players by the time they left.

Rookies (by Calder standards) that Richards has had include Ryan Johansen, Dalton Prout, David Savard, Cam Atkinson, John Moore, Ryan Murray, Boone Jenner, Michael Chaput, Alex Wennberg, Marko Dano, and Kerby Rychel. Obviously the jury is still out on several, but that's already a clear advantage to Richards...or should it be to the guy who acquired all except the last three on that list?

Yeah, Nash was in his prime when Hitchcock got in. He wasn't as developed into a complete player, but he'd already scored 30 and 40 goals in the previous two season (one of them while missing 28 games). Malhotra was in his prime; his defensive game was already brilliant, and he'd already set a career high in points that would only be broken (by four) when he had 2/3 of a season on a line with Nash.

I mentioned in the other thread that a huge part of coaching is being a salesman. Hitchcock was able to walk into a locker room and say, "I'm Ken Hitchcock. Here is my Stanley Cup ring, there's our captain with his two Stanley Cup rings, there's our Russian veteran with three of them, there's our Swedish veteran with his ring. I have the complete backing of ownership."

Richards was able to step in and say, "I won a Turner Cup in the IHL as a player 10 years ago. Pahlsson has a ring, but we all know he's on his way out the door anyway. I have an interim tag next to my name, so let's not screw things up too badly and maybe some of us will be back next year."

(DISCLAIMER: Obviously these are simulated conversations.)

Should we compare the reactions to when each coach was hired? One was lauded as "a winner", "demanding", "disciplined", and a whole host of other things that clearly pointed toward the idea of Columbus trending toward bigger and better things. The other was dismissed fairly quickly, having just been fired by Minnesota after a mere two seasons at the helm there.
Click to expand...

I'll disagree that Derick Brassard made a meaningful contribution to this team.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
Mayor Bee said:
Well, let's see here...

Rookies (by Calder standards) that Hitchcock developed include Gilbert Brule, Alexandre Picard, Marc Methot, Geoff Platt, Ole-Kristian Tollefsen, Curtis Glencross, Tom Sestito, Kris Russell, Jared Boll, Derick Brassard, Nikita Filatov, Steve Mason, Derek Dorsett, and Jakub Voracek. Only Mason, Brassard, and Voracek made anything resembling a meaningful contribution to Columbus, and none were truly high-level players by the time they left.

Rookies (by Calder standards) that Richards has had include Ryan Johansen, Dalton Prout, David Savard, Cam Atkinson, John Moore, Ryan Murray, Boone Jenner, Michael Chaput, Alex Wennberg, Marko Dano, and Kerby Rychel. Obviously the jury is still out on several, but that's already a clear advantage to Richards...or should it be to the guy who acquired all except the last three on that list?

Yeah, Nash was in his prime when Hitchcock got in. He wasn't as developed into a complete player, but he'd already scored 30 and 40 goals in the previous two season (one of them while missing 28 games). Malhotra was in his prime; his defensive game was already brilliant, and he'd already set a career high in points that would only be broken (by four) when he had 2/3 of a season on a line with Nash.

I mentioned in the other thread that a huge part of coaching is being a salesman. Hitchcock was able to walk into a locker room and say, "I'm Ken Hitchcock. Here is my Stanley Cup ring, there's our captain with his two Stanley Cup rings, there's our Russian veteran with three of them, there's our Swedish veteran with his ring. I have the complete backing of ownership."

Richards was able to step in and say, "I won a Turner Cup in the IHL as a player 10 years ago. Pahlsson has a ring, but we all know he's on his way out the door anyway. I have an interim tag next to my name, so let's not screw things up too badly and maybe some of us will be back next year."

(DISCLAIMER: Obviously these are simulated conversations.)

Should we compare the reactions to when each coach was hired? One was lauded as "a winner", "demanding", "disciplined", and a whole host of other things that clearly pointed toward the idea of Columbus trending toward bigger and better things. The other was dismissed fairly quickly, having just been fired by Minnesota after a mere two seasons at the helm there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is so full of inaccuracies I'm not going to bother. Like your posting MB, don't like revisionist history here. Your initial post was highly inaccurate, this is just as bad. You really need to go back and look at Malhotra's development again, as an example.

I highly enjoy you are going to blame the head coach for drafting and development. Methot made no contribution to Columbus? Boll and Dorse didn't develop into role players? rofl.

I'm so done.
 
Last edited:
Mayor Bee

Mayor Bee

Registered User
Dec 29, 2008
18,086
533
blahblah said:
Yeah, this is so full of inaccuracies I'm not going to bother. Like your posting MB, don't like revisionist history here. Your initial post was highly inaccurate, this is just as bad. You really need to go back and look at Malhotra's development again, as an example.

I highly enjoy you are going to blame the head coach for drafting and development. Methot made no contribution to Columbus? Boll and Dorse didn't develop into role players? rofl.

I'm so done.
Click to expand...

Boll and Dorsett developed into dime-a-dozen fourth line forwards, Methot was basically a third pairing guy in Columbus.

Drafting isn't in the domain of the coach, but development at the NHL level absolutely is. Hitchcock's entire career shows a particular pattern: he's able to get more out of young players who have already shown something at the NHL before he got there, but there's a troubling pattern of complete failure to develop young players who are not proven in professional hockey.

In Dallas, he had a lot of young guys who developed well. Modano discovered a defensive game, Sydor became a first-pairing guy, Lehtinen acclimated quickly to North America and took on a lot of responsibility early on, Matvichuk became a reliable defenseman. Then dig a little deeper....these guys had all shown something in pro hockey by that point. The players who hadn't but were highly touted around the league were in quite another boat: Todd Harvey, Grant Marshall, Patrick Cote, Jason Botterill, Petr Buzek, Sergey Gusev, Ric Jackman, Roman Lyashenko...none of them did much. The most notable exceptions are Brenden Morrow, who played less than two seasons with Hitchcock, and Jamie Langenbrunner, who is easily the best young Star who developed under Hitchcock.

In Philadelphia, Hitchcock couldn't get anything out of Patrick Sharp and Dennis Seidenberg, both of whom were so underwhelming that they were traded for scraps. However, he absolutely deserves credit for getting Joni Pitkanen up to a high level very quickly (although Pitkanen had already played two years at the highest level in Finland). Carter and Richards are both incompletes; they were with Hitchcock for a season plus eight games.

Now, if we're starting from a benchmark where you believe that a coach has little to do with player development, then this is a waste. I not only believe that a coach has a lot to do with player development, but is far and away the most important person for a young player entering the league.
 
CBJx614

CBJx614

Registered User
May 25, 2012
15,128
6,779
C-137
CBJWerenski8

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,601
24,667
Aaron Portzline ‏@Aportzline 15m15 minutes ago

Going through my player-contract archives - miss you, capgeek - and it occurs to be #CBJ D Cody Goloubef will be a Group 6 UFA on July 1
0 retweets 0 favorites


Aaron Portzline ‏@Aportzline 14m14 minutes ago

Goloubef is 25, has three years of pro experience, and has played less than 80 #NHL games.
 

major major

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
14,598
1,669
There are three players in the NHL with 30 or more goals and 40 or more assists.

Jamie Benn, John Tavares, and Nick Foligno.
 

Speedy Sanderson

Registered User
Jan 29, 2012
1,567
619
Jackets' average attendance this season was 15,511, which ranked 24th in the NHL. Last season they averaged 14,698 and were 27th. Not sure how next season will go - you have to figure some of the bump came from the playoff appearance and the ASG being here this season. Jackets will need to play well next year to have the numbers continue going north.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
 

CharlotteJacket

Registered User
Apr 11, 2013
2,060
921
Charlotte, NC
Speedy Sanderson said:
Jackets' average attendance this season was 15,511, which ranked 24th in the NHL. Last season they averaged 14,698 and were 27th. Not sure how next season will go - you have to figure some of the bump came from the playoff appearance and the ASG being here this season. Jackets will need to play well next year to have the numbers continue going north.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
Click to expand...

I wonder how many teams in the NHL would have the kind of attendance we have had with the product we've had to watch on the ice year after year. We've managed to fill the arena to about 75% consistently and I'll bet at least half of the teams would have cratered attendance wise if they had to watch the ***** show we've been forced to watch for over a decade. Congratulations to all of the CBJ fans for supporting this team through thick and thin in this "non traditional" hockey market.
 

eljefe72

Registered User
Jul 28, 2007
2,947
81
Columbus, Ohio
CharlotteJacket said:
I wonder how many teams in the NHL would have the kind of attendance we have had with the product we've had to watch on the ice year after year. We've managed to fill the arena to about 75% consistently and I'll bet at least half of the teams would have cratered attendance wise if they had to watch the ***** show we've been forced to watch for over a decade. Congratulations to all of the CBJ fans for supporting this team through thick and thin in this "non traditional" hockey market.
Click to expand...

It's especially amazing considering Columbus is located in the Sun Belt.
 

JacketsDavid

Registered User
Jan 11, 2013
2,650
890
Some of our attendance still dates back to PSLs - that folks are invested in the team. So that helps from some more cyclical teams.
As noted ASG helped this year as did the playoffs last season.
Next season will be VERY interesting - I have no idea if general public will see us as a tea on the rise, or a team that can't make the playoffs very often.
 
CBJx614

CBJx614

Registered User
May 25, 2012
15,128
6,779
C-137
Some other interesting info. For the first time in club history the jackets posted back to back 40 win seasons, and it's also the first time in club history the jackets have had 3 25+ goal scorers(Foligno, Johansen, Hartnell)

Also, from December 1 the Jackets were the 6th best team in the entire NHL and 4th in the East.
 
CBJx614

CBJx614

Registered User
May 25, 2012
15,128
6,779
C-137
Didnt know where to put this but i thought it was pretty funny.

[Tweet]590260761336750083[/Tweet]
 
Cyclones Rock

Cyclones Rock

Registered User
Jun 12, 2008
10,703
6,684
The Jackets are a "cap team" despite all the protestations from many on this board.

The Horton **** up really was a disgrace. Its ramifications will be felt for years. Completely inexcusable. Clarkson should be forced to wear #8 as a reminder of why he and his ridiculous contract is here.
 
SuperGenius

SuperGenius

For Duty & Humanity!
Mar 18, 2008
4,639
200
Cyclones Rock said:
The Jackets are a "cap team" despite all the protestations from many on this board.

The Horton **** up really was a disgrace. Its ramifications will be felt for years. Completely inexcusable. Clarkson should be forced to wear #8 as a reminder of why he and his ridiculous contract is here.
Click to expand...

I know you'll never let this go because you can see the future, but you just don't understand the reason for the deal - cash. Sure, LTIR provides cap relief, but not cash relief. Cash is more important to the CBJ than cap.

CBJ felt using cash to pay for a player that plays is better than a player that doesn't. Given that circumstance, the Clarkson deal was their best option. Keeping Clarkson at least has upside. Clearly you don't believe that, but it doesn't make it so.
 
Cyclones Rock

Cyclones Rock

Registered User
Jun 12, 2008
10,703
6,684
SuperGenius said:
I know you'll never let this go because you can see the future, but you just don't understand the reason for the deal - cash. Sure, LTIR provides cap relief, but not cash relief. Cash is more important to the CBJ than cap.

CBJ felt using cash to pay for a player that plays is better than a player that doesn't. Given that circumstance, the Clarkson deal was their best option. Keeping Clarkson at least has upside. Clearly you don't believe that, but it doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

Keep defending the indefensible. I know you will.

There is no excuse, none, for not insuring Horton. It was a managerial decision which can only described as completely incompetent. It's not 'monday morning qbing'. It's common sense.

Defend the FO for not insuring Horton. I'd love to hear the case.:laugh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom