What would change your assessment of Chevy? [Mod edit: title]

[Puckatron 3000]

You're presenting a false choice. The top pieces were there, we only had to add good supporting pieces and a league average goaltender. To suggest you have to sacrifice your future to add a good 3rd line and get an average goaltender is wildly exaggerating.

You think we were only an average goaltender and 3rd line away from contending? Seriously? We HAD that the year we got swept.

 

[White Out 403*]

You think we were only an average goaltender and 3rd line away from contending? Seriously? We HAD that the year we got swept.

No I didn't say contending. Contending requires a lot more and some luck. We were average goaltending and a better bottom end of our roster from being a consistent playoff team.

Last year we had depth and anything but consistent goaltending, but we still made it in. Pavelec had a very hot start and finish, Hutch a strong middle. But why did we get swept? Pavelec was sub 900 and blew 3 third period leads.

I mean, cmon. And look at that... Pavelec goes straight back into the toilet and we let our depth go and were back outside looking in. It's pretty straightforward in my eyes.

 

[KingBogo]

You're presenting a false choice. The top pieces were there, we only had to add good supporting pieces and a league average goaltender. To suggest you have to sacrifice your future to add a good 3rd line and get an average goaltender is wildly exaggerating.

As far as full rebuild goes... 0 playoffs wins is the same as 0 playoff appearances in my books. You'd really trade 2 years of faster rebuilding to be swept by Anaheim??

Also suggesting the only other option being Chevys is ludicrous to the point of insult. It's been explored over and over the mistakes he made at the bottom of the roster for F and D and goaltending that sunk this team over, and over , and over again.



This is such an oversimplification. I supported a rebuild in year 2 or 3. We're end of year 5. Rebuilding now means Chevys first 5 years are an unmitigated failure. Further, the assertion about the Jets having strong future is Oiler and Leafs talk. There's no evidence to support it; only hearse and conjecture. Will our youth become stars? Are we on track to be a contender? Who knows. It's guesswork. Which is why results and wins matter.

At some point don't you need to map out what should have been done differently? IMO an argument can be made the organization should have supported the older core and give them a real chance to contend. But to merely say get some supporting pieces doesn't offer much. IMO to really support the older core you need to get players capable of making a difference in a short period and there is a cost to it. So what types of costs should we have paid?

 

[Puckatron 3000]

Well, ok. I and prerty much everyone else agrees Pavs has generally been a boat anchor. What would have been your measure of success if not contending?

Now what do you spend to get it? Not prospects.

Now, what do we have left after the Atlanta core ages out? We must have traded some picks. And we drafted in significantly worse position if we accomplished what you hope.

 

[White Out 403*]

At some point don't you need to map out what should have been done differently? IMO an argument can be made the organization should have supported the older core and give them a real chance to contend. But to merely say get some supporting pieces doesn't offer much. IMO to really support the older core you need to get players capable of making a difference in a short period and there is a cost to it. So what types of costs should we have paid?

I've done that so many times I feel like I'm spamming the forum.

1) Best option imo was not to do a rebuild at any point. Build a better bottom half of roster. No Stuart Peluso and thor. Frolik extended, Lee extended. Pavelec never signed to his deal. Any other goaltender, almost literally, would have been better. I wont name one cuz over 5 years lots were available. Take your pick.

2) 2nd best option was to rebuild after year 1 or 2 when it became clear what chevy was trying wasn't working. But he didnt have the foresight or stones to do it. Instead he span the tires of this franchise in the mud for year 3 4 and now 5.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I've done that so many times I feel like I'm spamming the forum.

1) Best option imo was not to do a rebuild at any point. Build a better bottom half of roster. No Stuart Peluso and thor. Frolik extended, Lee extended. Pavelec never signed to his deal. Any other goaltender, almost literally, would have been better. I wont name one cuz over 5 years lots were available. Take your pick.

2) 2nd best option was to rebuild after year 1 or 2 when it became clear what chevy was trying wasn't working. But he didnt have the foresight or stones to do it. Instead he span the tires of this franchise in the mud for year 3 4 and now 5.

If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Those things didn't happen. I happen to agree that they probably should have. Where do we go from here?

 

[White Out 403*]

If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Those things didn't happen. I happen to agree that they probably should have. Where do we go from here?

I was asked a direct question. I answered. I don't know why you're calling me out on that.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I was asked a direct question. I answered. I don't know why you're calling me out on that.

Just askin' a question - no more, no less.

 

[KingBogo]

I've done that so many times I feel like I'm spamming the forum.

1) Best option imo was not to do a rebuild at any point. Build a better bottom half of roster. No Stuart Peluso and thor. Frolik extended, Lee extended. Pavelec never signed to his deal. Any other goaltender, almost literally, would have been better. I wont name one cuz over 5 years lots were available. Take your pick.

2) 2nd best option was to rebuild after year 1 or 2 when it became clear what chevy was trying wasn't working. But he didnt have the foresight or stones to do it. Instead he span the tires of this franchise in the mud for year 3 4 and now 5.

So we were basically option 1 last season. Peluso didn't play. Most teams have someone similar to Thor on the 4th and he didn't play up the lineup in the playoffs. Stu is an anchor but the Hawks were able to basically run 4 d to a cup win so that should have little impact on a true contender. And Pavs for once in his career earned his paycheck. But how do we get past a bubble team that sneaks into the playoffs and get to contender status without paying a price?

 

[White Out 403*]

Just askin' a question - no more, no less.

Where do we go from here?

Ideally, and I've posted this before, Cheveldayoff is demoted to head of scouting, and a new GM who has a little more vision and courage on how to build a team steps in. We're in a tight spot right now because CHevy has ignored all signs needed to rebuild and kind of left us in a no where'sville. If we do a full rebuild it will be quite an insult to fans after the first 5 seasons are a wash.

I think now is a good time to cash in on all this 'depth' and see if we can build a better team and compete. What that looks like I can't say without being further called out for wishing it was a Merry Christmas.

 

[White Out 403*]

So we were basically option 1 last season. Peluso didn't play. Most teams have someone similar to Thor on the 4th and he didn't play up the lineup in the playoffs.

Peluso played over half the games last year. So, no, he did play. lol. Most teams having a guy like thor isn't an argument. THe guy is a terrible playe, who has horrible possession metrics and doesn't score at all. An anchor and a turd no one matter how much you want to try and polish it.

Stu is an anchor but the Hawks were able to basically run 4 d to a cup win so that should have little impact on a true contender. And Pavs for once in his career earned his paycheck. But how do we get past a bubble team that sneaks into the playoffs and get to contender status without paying a price?

The blackhawks rode a top 4 to a cup, and this some how makes it ok to have stuart on our 2nd D pairing?

What? What kind of... what? That makes no sense.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

White Out - I don't think the changes you suggested makes us as good as the Jets are poised to now become. For a much longer time. In more sustainable fashion.

But I understand you had more faith (heh) in the old core than in the new. I guess time will tell.

 

[KingBogo]

Where do we go from here?

Ideally, and I've posted this before, Cheveldayoff is demoted to head of scouting, and a new GM who has a little more vision and courage on how to build a team steps in. We're in a tight spot right now because CHevy has ignored all signs needed to rebuild and kind of left us in a no where'sville. If we do a full rebuild it will be quite an insult to fans after the first 5 seasons are a wash.

I think now is a good time to cash in on all this 'depth' and see if we can build a better team and compete. What that looks like I can't say without being further called out for wishing it was a Merry Christmas.

IMO more vision and courage would mean a maximization of current resources in an attempt to convert into future resources. That is trading off the remainder of the older core for future pieces....or trading the future for a current window. You could resign Ladd for 6X6 in the off season trade a couple of your top prospects for real solid vet middle 6 guys F and 3 and 4 d and have the bottom feeders cover large chucks of their salaries in the deal. You could probably create a 2-3 year window.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I think now is a good time to cash in on all this 'depth' and see if we can build a better team and compete. What that looks like I can't say without being further called out for wishing it was a Merry Christmas.

I posted that, as it was backwards looking - I tend to not do that myself, but you're welcome to. Whether or not I or others agree with you (and I actually do agree with many of your thoughts on what should have been done in the past), pining for it won't make it happen now.

So I asked: where do we go from here?

Where do we go from here?

Ideally, and I've posted this before, Cheveldayoff is demoted to head of scouting, and a new GM who has a little more vision and courage on how to build a team steps in. We're in a tight spot right now because CHevy has ignored all signs needed to rebuild and kind of left us in a no where'sville. If we do a full rebuild it will be quite an insult to fans after the first 5 seasons are a wash.

If we're in Nowheresville, then then how do we re-form this roster to extract ourselves from this visionless insult? There has to be a few decent roster pieces plus prospects that could tip it back in the right direction without a complete rebuild?

 

[KingBogo]

Peluso played over half the games last year. So, no, he did play. lol. Most teams having a guy like thor isn't an argument. THe guy is a terrible playe, who has horrible possession metrics and doesn't score at all. An anchor and a turd no one matter how much you want to try and polish it.



The blackhawks rode a top 4 to a cup, and this some how makes it ok to have stuart on our 2nd D pairing?

What? What kind of... what? That makes no sense.

Peluso didn't play in the playoffs or even after the TD much. I'm merely saying the players you are putting the blame on are inconsequential in the final outcome.

 

[White Out 403*]

To King and bogo and puck:
Do you think Chevy was wrong to not blow up the core earlier and move put Atlanta pieces after year 2 or 3?

 

[KingBogo]

To King and bogo and puck:
Do you think Chevy was wrong to not blow up the core earlier and move put Atlanta pieces after year 2 or 3?

In retrospect...yes. But my biggest complaint is undeserved loyalty to core "glue' players. But I'm happy we are where we are now rather that continuing to make futile attempts at holding on to the middle ground of a bubble team. You are not debating blind Chevy fans but at least in my case someone who is happy we finally got where we needed to go. And I do give Chevy credit for building a really nice group of young players that again IMO have the potential to be core piece of a lot more competitive team then we inherited from Atlanta. I'm also really patient.

 

[White Out 403*]

In retrospect...yes. But my biggest complaint is undeserved loyalty to core "glue' players. But I'm happy we are where we are now rather that continuing to make futile attempts at holding on to the middle ground of a bubble team. You are not debating blind Chevy fans but at least in my case someone who is happy we finally got where we needed to go. And I do give Chevy credit for building a really nice group of young players that again IMO have the potential to be core piece of a lot more competitive team then we inherited from Atlanta. I'm also really patient.

Well, at least we can agree it was a mistake. How big a mistake and how much forgiveness given is quite different I think. Which is ok. Everyone has different opinions. I do take some issue with you saying your really patient. The implication being I'm not, whether you mean to suggest that or not. I am a very patient person but Chevys mistakes make me believe that he doesn't just need more time. He simply doesn't cut the mustard.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

To King and bogo and puck:
Do you think Chevy was wrong to not blow up the core earlier and move put Atlanta pieces after year 2 or 3?

Good question.

I've talked about it before. The way I look at it is this. It would have been a higher risk move. It might have worked out better. Or worse. As such I think it is a reasonable argument.

Here are the risks i see involved. The new players would have had no veteran leadership, in an almost certainly far worse team. That can impact development. The multi-year Buffalo (or Edmonton) style tank would have put a lot of strain on the new organization. We lose very good players before knowing what we really had (e.g. Wheeler, Buff). We may have lost the ability to sign good free agents along the way (e.g. Perreault). Maybe we can't attract a coach better than Noel.

If everything went close ro perfect, we come out ahead of where we are today. Accelerated the process. Although we had to endure some really bad hockey along the way.

If it didn't go well, we're in much worse shape. With most of the fans' good will already exhausted.

 

[CaptainChef]

You think we were only an average goaltender and 3rd line away from contending? Seriously? We HAD that the year we got swept.

Awe you mean that "average" .890 goalie who couldn't stop a beachball in third when it mattered. That team that had been beat down all year by playing only three lines yet they managed to hold a lead until the third in almost every game. Yep, bunch of no good bums on that team

 

[surixon]

To King and bogo and puck:
Do you think Chevy was wrong to not blow up the core earlier and move put Atlanta pieces after year 2 or 3?

You didn't ask me but I hope you don't mind if I chime in. I don't think he was wrong. We didn't have stop gap pieces to step in to shield the kids so while we may have drafted higher and had a few more prospects imo we don't put our kids in the proper environment to develop.

Also what real harm was done in holding onto them, we still got good value for Ladd, Wheeler and Little probably have better value than they did in years 2 or 3 so Chevy will get good value if he elects to move them now.

While everyone is entitled to their opinions I find it curious that people would want to build around the Ladd core. It isn't just sacrificing future draft picks to really support them its also sacrificing cap space.

Last year when the team made the playoffs the core was the following ages:

Buff 30
Ladd 29
Wheeler 28
Enstrom 30
Little 27

Lately evidence suggests that players prime ends around age 27 or 28. Given that the core are all past that age how wise would it have been to truly invest what would have been necessary to truly make that core a contender. Even if you did invest the resources (Cap and assets to support) how long do you realistically think the window would be? Maurice mentioned 3 years in his recent interview and I feel that would be a realistic window that the Ladd core could have competed at a high level.

I would rather they build around a core that looks to have an average age around 22 year old next year and try to position the window over a 7 year period through the young players prime years.

By keeping the vets we allowed our young players to develop at there own pace in a positive environment. We now are starting to have a number of them become NHL ready at a similar time which should increase inter organizational competition for roster spots. It will also allow for the movement of Veteran players to further support the young talent on the roster.

 

[KingBogo]

Well, at least we can agree it was a mistake. How big a mistake and how much forgiveness given is quite different I think. Which is ok. Everyone has different opinions. I do take some issue with you saying your really patient. The implication being I'm not, whether you mean to suggest that or not. I am a very patient person but Chevys mistakes make me believe that he doesn't just need more time. He simply doesn't cut the mustard.

I think we see Chevy's mistakes differently. I see them as small barriers along the way rather than fundamental missteps that block the future. As long as he gets the loyalty to "glue" players out of his head. The being patient part is I'm okay with the direction now even if it should have happened earlier rather than continue along what I believe is the wrong path. And I do believe the young talent we have now will grow into a better team we inherited from Atlanta. I envision a team with 1 center above Little (with a little draft lottery luck 2). 1 winger above Wheeler (maybe Ehlers or Connor) and 1 D above or at least equal to Buff. That and one of Helly or Comrie becomes a true #1 goalie. If you can than fill a bottom 6 with a boat load of hunger kids we have swarming around. Then maybe you have a contender.

Anyways appreciate the debate. I never have a problem disagreeing and sometimes agreeing in a respectful discussion.

 

[CaptainChef]

Peluso didn't play in the playoffs or even after the TD much. I'm merely saying the players you are putting the blame on are inconsequential in the final outcome.

Hardly. The reason why the team was playing their top 9 and especially the top 6 so much last year was because they had mere plugs in the bottom end until the TD. By the time they got to the playoffs, most were so beat up, injured and generally worn out that they had nothing left. That and the sieve in goal & its goodnight Irene.

 

[White Out 403*]

You didn't ask me but I hope you don't mind if I chime in. I don't think he was wrong. We didn't have stop gap pieces to step in to shield the kids so while we may have drafted higher and had a few more prospects imo we don't put our kids in the proper environment to develop.

Also what real harm was done in holding onto them, we still got good value for Ladd, Wheeler and Little probably have better value than they did in years 2 or 3 so Chevy will get good value if he elects to move them now.

The more the merrier.

I disagree about no harm being done. Vehemently. Had we moved those pieces out sooner, we would be 2-3 years ahead of our current state. Instead of Dano we'd have some other player 2-3 years older and further along his development, as an example. Our draft pick coming up from the Hawks this year would already be looking to break into the NHL if not already there.

So ... those benefits to me outweigh what we had. But, ideally, for me the team was fine. We had a decent core but Chevy failed in addressing our weaknesses.

Hardly. The reason why the team was playing their top 9 and especially the top 6 so much last year was because they had mere plugs in the bottom end until the TD. By the time they got to the playoffs, mist were so beat up, injured and generally worn out that they had nothing left. That and the sieve in goal & its goodnight Irene.

2 separate posters in the last week or so have both claimed Peluso hasnt played at all this year, and the last. Yet evidence shows he actually played in over half the games. Quite a blind spot.

 

[KingBogo]

Hardly. The reason why the team was playing their top 9 and especially the top 6 so much last year was because they had mere plugs in the bottom end until the TD. By the time they got to the playoffs, most were so beat up, injured and generally worn out that they had nothing left. That and the sieve in goal & its goodnight Irene.

I've never come across any stats that suggest the Jets top players played more minutes than comparable players on other teams. Teams with really top end players tend to ride them harder than the Jets did their top players.