Speculation: What changes should be made for this team to be successful?

[marcel snapshot]

1. No Cup
2. Cup win by team that'd won 4 in the last decade.
3. Brett Hull was a rookie when traded
4. No Cup

1. Farther in the playoffs than this group
2. Farther in the playoffs than this group
3. Farther in the playoffs than this group
4. Farther in the playoffs than this group

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

We've seen an Ovie-led team with little center depth, no defense, and unreliable goaltending dominate the league when it had good coaching.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

1. Farther in the playoffs than this group
2. Farther in the playoffs than this group
3. Farther in the playoffs than this group
4. Farther in the playoffs than this group

Sure, lets ignore the team performance before the trades and the construction of the rest of the team. Makes sense.

 

[strungout]

We've seen an Ovie-led team with little center depth, no defense, and unreliable goaltending dominate the league when it had good coaching.

This is true.

 

[marcel snapshot]

We've seen an Ovie-led team with little center depth, no defense, and unreliable goaltending dominate the league when it had good coaching.

Absolutely true - but at that time, the identity of the team was synced exactly with the way Ovie played the game. He was the perfect leader for a "release the hounds" team. And if we opt to go back to that style, he remains the right leader. But that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

You might have missed the post where I advocated getting rid of GMGM and Oates.

There's a difference between analysis and blame assignment. Ovie does what he's supposed to be do - he scores goals. Does that automatically make him the best fit to be the captain and leader of the team?

My point with the Brett Hull example was to point to a model of a player that performs like Ovie, but isn't burdened with the pressure of being the team leader and embodiment of its identity. Did his teams have better supporting casts and coaching than Ovie's? Yes no doubt - and hopefully that happens here with a new braintrust.

But Hull's teams had success in part because was recognized and treated for who he was - a great goal scorer - and wasn't expected to be anything he wasn't (two-way player, loose puck hunter, board battler, shot blocker, responsible puck possessor blah blah - all the stuff you want from a captain that Ovie gets burdened with because he's a captain, but which really aren't elements of his game

Guess you missed the part where you said Ovie should be stripped of the captaincy due to his lack of two-way game.

 

[BrooklynCapsFan]

We've seen an Ovie-led team with little center depth, no defense, and unreliable goaltending dominate the league when it had good coaching.

We've seen Ovie put up more than a point and a half per game and fail to reach the conference finals because our defense sucked. You need more than one winger in the postseason.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

Absolutely true - but at that time, the identity of the team was synced exactly with the way Ovie played the game. He was the perfect leader for a "release the hounds" team. And if we opt to go back to that style, he remains the right leader. But that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Why should style of play have anything to do with who's captain? Leadership should determine who's captain.

 

[marcel snapshot]

Why should style of play have anything to do with who's captain? Leadership should determine who's captain.

Well if you don't think your captain and your leaders should reflect your style of play and identity, then we just disagree on the function of a captain.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

We've seen Ovie put up more than a point and a half per game and fail to reach the conference finals because our defense sucked. You need more than one winger in the postseason.

Yes, which is my point entirely. Look what the team did with almost nothing supporting Ovie. He can be built around and its silly to trade him given how good the team was without those other elements. Add those other elements around him.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

Well if you don't think your captain and your leaders should reflect your style of play, then we just disagree on the function of a captain.

I guess we do.

Did Scott Stevens reflect a passive, trapping style?

I suppose you'd advocate changing captains any time a system is changed?

 

[strungout]

This whole discussion just makes me hate Mafki more for changing how Bruce coached...compared to fixing the roster.

 

[g00n]

Nash? Youre using Nash as an Ovie comparable? Absurd.

Give me a multi-time MVP traded in any sport that worked out for the trading team.

*sigh*

Didn't I already say they weren't exactly the same, and asked more than once WHO in NHL history could even be considered 100% comparable?

From a marketing standpoint within a team's plans, and in relation to the fears surrounding making such a big change, the situations are comparable. Read what I wrote on the subject already.

 

[g00n]

Even if you reel him back into reality and say "Face of the franchise"-type players (and not multi-mvp winners which I agree is absurd), how many team has that worked out for trading AWAY the franchise guy....NOT MANY.

And how many times was that done because a crappy, small market team couldn't afford the star player they tanked into anymore or because the franchise was mismanaged to begin with?

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

*sigh*

Didn't I already say they weren't exactly the same, and asked more than once WHO in NHL history could even be considered 100% comparable?

From a marketing standpoint within a team's plans, and in relation to the fears surrounding making such a big change, the situations are comparable. Read what I wrote on the subject already.

Except they're not really comparable. You're comparing a guy who probably quite literally saved hockey in a city to a guy who was just a franchise's first star player. One who's one of the NHL'S premier players to one who's got no national appeal.

Two different marketing animals.

 

[g00n]

This showed up in my fb feed this morning:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...id-the-washington-capitals-become-such-a-mess

A quote here echoes my previous comment:

J.P. over at Japers' Rink, who has forgotten more about Capitals hockey than I'll ever know, has watched the team slowly eat itself alive since that franchise-changing loss to the Canadiens.

"To me, everything started to come off the rails when they got away from who they were and what they did well and started chasing what others thought they should be," he says, "and they're at a point now where I'm not even sure the general manager and the head coach are on the same page with respect to what they want to do on the ice or the personnel needed to do it.

"There simply doesn't appear to be a coherent vision of what they are or are going to be as a team.

"They've been in scramble mode for nearly three years, and it's caught up with them."

What a mess.

 

[g00n]

Except they're not really comparable. You're comparing a guy who probably quite literally saved hockey in a city to a guy who was just a franchise's first star player. One who's one of the NHL'S premier players to one who's got no national appeal.

Two different marketing animals.

You're looking at it from the outsider, league perspective, not the internal, local perspective. Nash was their Ovechkin. We sit here and say they're obviously not exactly the same, but to Columbus fans and the organization itself he was their #1 and the cornerstone of their start-up franchise. Absolutely comparable when talking about that specific dynamic.

 

[Stewie G]

You're looking at it from the outsider, league perspective, not the internal, local perspective. Nash was their Ovechkin. We sit here and say they're obviously not exactly the same, but to Columbus fans and the organization itself he was their #1 and the cornerstone of their start-up franchise. Absolutely comparable when talking about that specific dynamic.

Did Rick Nash get the Jackets on national TV? Did Rick Nash lead the league in jersey sales at any point in his career? Do scores of people show up in Rick Nash jerseys in other arenas around the league?

You can't just make comparisons at a local level if one has had a completely different effect on how it affects the team from a national/leaguewide perspective.

Rick Nash is much closer to a Nick Backstrom league-wide than an Ovechkin.

 

[Mothra]

Well if you don't think your captain and your leaders should reflect your style of play and identity, then we just disagree on the function of a captain.

Im not getting it....so youre saying one of the big problems on the team, which would prevent any real success...is Ovechkin has a piece of fabric on his sweater shaped in a C?

I dont believe, for a second, that the players who are lazy and dont perform in crunch time dont do that because...well hey, Ovchkin doesnt yell enough or backcheck great every shift.

The Captain and the Alternates are there to talk to refs, historically. Be that go between, so to speak. So what that he isnt a rah-rah leader or great in all zones....any player using that as an excuse will always have an excuse

 

[g00n]

Did Rick Nash get the Jackets on national TV? Did Rick Nash lead the league in jersey sales at any point in his career? Do scores of people show up in Rick Nash jerseys in other arenas around the league?

You can't just make comparisons at a local level if one has had a completely different effect on how it affects the team from a national/leaguewide perspective.

Rick Nash is much closer to a Nick Backstrom league-wide than an Ovechkin.

Read the comment you responded to again, and think about what you just said.

Are you looking to build a team based on national jersey sales and TV appearances? Want to compare the point trends for each team over the last 3 seasons?

 

[swimmer77]

Punt Oates (fire him)

Pass Green to someone else for something else (trade him to shake up the core)

Kick Kolzig (fire Kolzig)

Get an experienced coach - one with NHL experience. Preferably one with some emotion to light a fire under these players' arses.

And then there is GMGM. He's made some good deals. The one iota I'd like to know, which I doubt I will ever be privy to, is whether or not Ted restricts GMGM's coaching selection now to former Caps. Who's idea was this. It's analogous to Montreal restricting itself to bilingual coaches. If it's a GMGM thing then I say he goes too. If it isn't I need more reasons to jump on the fire GMGM bandwagon.

 

[Liberati0n*]

Rick Nash is much closer to a Nick Backstrom league-wide than an Ovechkin.

He's not Ovechkin star-wise, but he is absolutely closer to him than to Backstrom. That's just insane.

 

[Stewie G]

He's not Ovechkin star-wise, but he is absolutely closer to him than to Backstrom. That's just insane.

The guy has never broken 80 points in his career. Being the best player on a terrible team gets you inflated numbers (and not really all that inflated) and All-Star game sympathy selections. Doesn't make him a star.

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

Read the comment you responded to again, and think about what you just said.

Are you looking to build a team based on national jersey sales and TV appearances? Want to compare the point trends for each team over the last 3 seasons?

You've gone from local market importance to team building. The gap between Nash and Ovechkin is even bigger when you consider hockey ability and team building.

Regarding your comment on point trends, are you trying to imply that the Caps would be trending upwards if they'd traded Ovechkin 3 seasons ago?

 

[Stewie G]

Read the comment you responded to again, and think about what you just said.

Are you looking to build a team based on national jersey sales and TV appearances? Want to compare the point trends for each team over the last 3 seasons?

You can't just ignore the bigger picture. You're needlessly narrowing the scope of the discussion to make it fit your stance.

Let's also look at points trends without any context at all and infer that it is due to one team trading its best player and the other one holding on to theirs.