Winnipeg Jets Prospect Thread (Part XIV)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rheged

JMFT
Feb 19, 2010
3,459
1,500
Winnipeg
(MOD: Previous prospects thread is here: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1808651)

Winnipeg Jets Player Stats Update
Last Updated 3/28/2015

[size=+1]Regular Season[/size]

NHL Skaters
Player|Pos.|GP|Goals|Assists|Points|PIM|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Adam Lowry|LW|73|10|11|21|44|Winnipeg Jets|3/29/1993|Canada|Round 3, #67 Overall
Ben Chiarot|D|36|2|6|8|22|Winnipeg Jets|5/9/1991|Canada|Round 4, #120 Overall

NHL Goalies
Player|Pos.|GP|W|L|SO|GAA|SV%|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Michael Hutchinson|G|35|20|15|2|2.43|.913|Winnipeg Jets|3/2/1990|Canada|Round 6, #154 Overall

CHL Skaters
Player|Pos.|GP|Goals|Assists|Points|PIM|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Nikolaj Ehlers|LW|51|37|64|101|67|Halifax Mooseheads, QMJHL|2/14/1996|Denmark|Round 1, #9 Overall
Nic Petan|C|54|15|74|89|41|Portland Winterhawks, WHL|3/22/1995|Canada|Round 2, #43 Overall
Chase De Leo|C|67|39|45|84|30|Portland Winterhawks, WHL|10/25/1995|USA|Round 4, #99 Overall
Jimmy Lodge|C|58|28|35|63|53|Mississauga Steelheads, OHL|3/5/1995|USA|Round 3, #84 Overall
Brendan Lemieux|LW|57|41|19|60|145|Barrie Colts, OHL|3/15/1996|USA|Round 2, #31 Overall
Axel Blomqvist|RW|61|25|34|59|26|Moose Jaw Warriors, WHL|1/30/1995|Sweden|Undrafted
Josh Morrissey|D|47|13|25|38|62|Kelowna Rockets, WHL|3/28/1995|Canada|Round 1, #13 Overall
Jan Kostalek|D|57|7|36|43|35|Rimouski Oceanic, QMJHL|2/17/1995|Czech Rep.|Round 4, #114 Overall
Nelson Nogier|D|60|3|16|19|84|Red Deer Rebels, WHL|5/27/1996|Canada|Round 4, #101 Overall

CHL Goalies
Player|Pos.|GP|W|L|SO|GAA|SV%|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Eric Comrie|G|34|17|17|1|2.85|.914|Tri-City Americans, WHL|7/6/1995|Canada|Round 2, #59 Overall

NCAA Skaters
Player|Pos.|GP|Goals|Assists|Points|PIM|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Andrew Copp|C|36|14|17|31|29|Michigan, Big 10|7/8/1994|USA|Round 4, #104 Overall
Matt Ustaski|LW|24|4|4|8|20|Wisconsin, Big 10|5/27/1994|USA|Round 7, #192 Overall
Tanner Lane|C|32|2|6|8|18|Nebraska-Omaha, NCAC|8/13/1992|USA|Round 6, #160 Overall
Brennan Serville|D|33|0|7|7|12|Michigan, Big 10|6/2/1993|Canada|Round 3, #78 Overall
Peter Stoykewych|D|34|3|8|11|42|Colorado, NCAC|7/14/1992|Canada|Round 7, #199 Overall
Aaron Harstad|D|30|5|4|9|32|Colorado, NCAC|4/27/1992|USA|Round 7, #187 Overall
CJ Franklin|LW|36|8|19|27|21|Minnesota State, WCHA|3/17/1994|USA|Round 5, #129 Overall
Tucker Poolman|D|38|8|8|16|12|North Dakota, NCAC|6/8/1993|USA|Round 5, #127 Overall
Jack Glover|D|22|0|3|3|6|Minnesota, Big 10|5/17/1996|USA|Round 3, #69 Overall

NCAA Goalies
Player|Pos.|GP|W|L|SO|GAA|SV%|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Jamie Phillips|G|41|28|11|6|1.74|.933|Michigan Tech, WCHA|3/24/1993|Canada|Round 7, #190 Overall

International Skaters
Player|Pos.|GP|Goals|Assists|Points|PIM|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Alexander Burmistrov|C|53|10|16|26|40|Ak Bars, KHL|10/21/1991|Russia|Round 1, #8 Overall
Ivan Telegin|C|31|3|1|4|29|CSKA Moscow, KHL|2/28/1992|Russia|Round 4, #101 Overall
Pavel Kraskovsky|C|29|6|16|22|34|Loko Yaroslavl, MHL|9/11/1996|Russia|Round 6, #164 Overall
Arturs Kulda|D|45|4|5|9|28|Salavat Yulaev Ufa, KHL|7/25/1988|Latvia|Round 7, #200 Overall
Marcus Karlström|D|26|0|2|2|4|Mora, Allsveskan|1/6/1995|Sweden|Round 7, #194 Overall

ECHL Skaters
Player|Pos.|GP|Goals|Assists|Points|PIM|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Ralfs Freibergs|D|47|3|11|14|12|Ontario Reign|5/17/1991|Latvia|Undrafted

ECHL Goalies
Player|Pos.|GP|W|L|SO|GAA|SV%|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Jussi Olkinoura|G|37|22|14|1|2.43|.915|Ontario Reign|11/4/1990|Finland|Undrafted

AHL Skaters
Player|Pos.|GP|Goals|Assists|Points|PIM|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Eric O'Dell|C|37|14|15|29|34|St. John's IceCaps|6/21/1990|Canada|Round 2, #39 Overall
JC Lipon|RW|68|4|19|23|139|St. John's IceCaps|7/10/1993|Canada|Round 3, #91 Overall
Austen Brassard|C|68|5|10|15|60|St. John's IceCaps|1/14/1993|Canada|Round 5, #149 Overall
Patrice Cormier|C|42|9|7|16|64|St. John's IceCaps|6/14/1990|Canada|Round 2, #54 Overall
Joel Armia|RW|47|10|19|29|47|St. John's IceCaps|5/31/1993|Finland|Round 1, #16 Overall
Ryan Olsen|C|59|4|5|9|47|St. John's IceCaps|3/25/1994|Canada|Round 6, #160 Overall
Scott Kosmachuk|RW|63|13|12|25|60|St. John's IceCaps|1/24/1994|Canada|Round 3, #70 Overall
John Albert|C|64|16|26|42|26|St. John's IceCaps|1/19/1989|USA|Round 6, #175 Overall
Brenden Kichton|D|58|8|16|24|26|St. John's IceCaps|6/18/1992|Canada|Round 7, #190 Overall
Ben Chiarot|D|24|4|5|9|21|St. John's IceCaps|5/9/1991|Canada|Round 4, #120 Overall
Will O'Neill|D|65|10|32|42|63|St. John's IceCaps|4/28/1988|USA|Round 7, #210 Overall
Julian Melchiori|D|68|1|5|6|54|St. John's IceCaps|12/6/1991|Canada|Round 3, #87 Overall
Ralfs Freibergs|D|5|0|2|2|2|St. John's IceCaps|5/17/1991|Latvia|Undrafted

AHL Goalies
Player|Pos.|GP|W|L|SO|GAA|SV%|Team/League|DOB|Country|Drafted
Connor Hellebuyck|G|56|28|25|6|2.56|.922|St. John's IceCaps|5/19/1993|USA|Round 5, #130 Overall


[post=89849119]Final stats for last season[/post]

 
Last edited:

veganhunter

Mexico City Coyotes!
Feb 15, 2010
2,934
3
Calgary
That's my point. I think he is more likely to make the team on a wing.

Honestly, except for Slater I think we are pretty solid at C for the foreseeable future. I don't think a 4C to replace Slater should be all that hard to find. Copp might be it. I think Lowry is too good for the job, or will be. Copp may also be overqualified in which case we have one of those 'good to have' problems.

Definitely the easier path to the NHL at this point.
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,187
28,768
I sorry that you are baffled. You can't imagine how who decides to play would work? I don't know if you are serious.

Maybe you haven't worked as a team of experts before? Why does 1 person need authority over all the decisions and people? I am positive one person is not the most capable in all facets. These aren't replaceable admin staff, these are elite specialists. All I am suggesting it that it is superior to spread the responsibility and authority around. Look how many HC's consistently fail in certain areas.

If Wade Flaherty for example is a goalie specialist, why give the power to another guy to make the wrong decision over and over again? These are hypotheticals, i don't care if Flaherty does or doesn't choose a goalie. If garret is on staff and is better at choosing an optimal lineup why let another guy have authority over that decision? Delegating and discussing with your reports isn't the same thing. Collaboration is a necessity.

This isn't something that doesn't exist. People do work like this.

I worked as a member of a team of experts all my working life. After all the experts give their opinions and advice it always comes down to one person to make the final decision. That person was not the most capable in all facets. Often he/she wasn't the most capable in any single facet. He/she was the decision maker though and was supposed to be the one best at that. Even when decisions were made by consensus there was someone who had to say something to the effect of "alright if there is no further discussion this is how it will be". I can't imagine how a hockey team would be run if no one is in charge. Am I misunderstanding what you are saying? If so, please enlighten me.
 

ps241

The Ballad of Ville Bobby
Sponsor
Mar 10, 2010
34,828
30,966
I think NHL coaching structure in general is setup for failure. Command & control management is inefficient as it puts too much control with a single person. Why the HC by default has final say on all coaching related decisions is asking for trouble at this level. When coaches display the same flaws in strategy or tactics or management or all the above, why keep giving them say over these things if they don't improve them? It's a pretty bizarre field to be in.

I think this is the OP that put forth your view? Not being a smart a55 I am trying to follow your train of thought to agree or debate.

Assuming that the Jets coaching process isn't highly collaborative for a minute for the sake of conversation how would you propose a "team approach" to coaching would work? How would you divide power to decentralize more? How does it play out? Does this apply to all NHL teams?
 

DEANYOUNGBLOOD17

Registered User
May 10, 2011
3,397
1,348
Back on topic............

-Copp..... good....... hope he signs a pro contract in March....

- Kostelak......good ...... hope he signs a pro contract in March

- Lodge....good .... hope he signs a pro contract in March


................:yo:............;:handclap:........
 

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
Back on topic............

-Copp..... good....... hope he signs a pro contract in March...

Big Ten Tournament (March 19-20-20)

NCAA regionals (March 27-28-29)

Frozen Four (April 9-10-11)

Michigan will likely need to at least reach the final of the BT tourney to get invited to the regional.
 

DEANYOUNGBLOOD17

Registered User
May 10, 2011
3,397
1,348
Big Ten Tournament (March 19-20-20)

NCAA regionals (March 27-28-29)

Frozen Four (April 9-10-11)

Michigan will likely need to at least reach the final of the BT tourney to get invited to the regional.

Right now Michigan is roughly tied with 2 other teams in the Big 10 conference for 2 nd .. 3 rd and fourth out of 6 teams with 6 or 7 games games left in the season.... Depending how the last 3- 4 weeks go they will be 2 nd ... 3 rd ... Or 4 th....:
IF they win most of these final game s in which they play 2 games each against the teams they are battle- ing .... They could get 2 nd place and get the bye for th qtr final game on Thurs march 27 as 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5......on the 28 th 2 plays the winner of 3 vs 6 and the 1 st place team Minnestota plays the winner of teams placed 4 vs 5

Of course the winner is decided on the sat night game ... Single knockout

If they win this tourney they get an automatic by to the final 16
And play the next weekend ..... If they win that bracket they get to play in the frozen four tourney.... In April

If they do not win the tourney the Big 10 tourney at the end of March they may get to play in the final 16 tourney by selection due to ranking of the final teams that did not win their division. Right now they are ranked 16 or 17 out of the 50 schools. So getting to the 2 nd tourney by the back door ranking is likly 50/50 depending how they do the final 3 weeks of the season....

So if Michigan loses a game on march 27 th 28 th or 29 tn the single game knockout and they do not rank in the top 16 teams in the country ....... Copp could be done College as early as the end of March ( 30th) and able to sign with the Jets for the 5 last NHL games of the season in April
Sorry wrong dates ???? Is the big 10 tourney the 20/21 22 o r is it the following week .... I will check...
 
Last edited:

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
Right now Michigan is roughly tied with 2 other teams in the conference for 2 nd .. 3 rd and fourth out of 6 teams with 6 or 7 games games left in the season.... Depending how the last 3- 4 weeks go they will be 2 nd ... 3 rd ... Or 4 th....:
IF they win most of these final game sin which they play 2 games each against the teams they are battle- ing .... They could get 2 nd

They are also ranked #15 in the nation
 

pucka lucka

Registered User
Apr 7, 2010
5,913
2,581
Ottawa
I think this is the OP that put forth your view? Not being a smart a55 I am trying to follow your train of thought to agree or debate.

Assuming that the Jets coaching process isn't highly collaborative for a minute for the sake of conversation how would you propose a "team approach" to coaching would work? How would you divide power to decentralize more? How does it play out? Does this apply to all NHL teams?

It was a comment on command and control management style, which pro sports seems to still subscribe to. I noticed a pattern when discussing Maurice's with someone. As someone pointed out, the same weaknesses that have followed him throughout his career. This is a problem with a lot of HC's in many sports. The job is too wide and too difficult to give 1 person authority and responsibility in all facets of coaching a big league sports team. I think the current definition of a HC is a poor one, and leads to a lot of inefficiency in the field.

There is no need to put all that authority and responsibility with a single person. I have no idea why so many people think it has to work this way. This isn't about consensus building or a democracy; it's about empowering a team of experts with authority and responsibility over their own specialization working as a team. They are free to collaborate. They as a team still answer to someone or something, e.g. measure against KPI's, which everyone is anyways.

A coach who manages the team in game or designs the systems they play or optimizes line up choices doesn't need to be the same person. A HC delagating is far from the same thing, everything still goes through them. Think of the problem domain of running the day to day ops of a hockey team. There are many subdomains of varying importance which make up the larger domain. A HC currently has authority over all those subdomains that apply to coaching/day-to-day player management.

I am not talking about having 3 HC's with equal authority try to duke it out and make a hockey team run.
 

Aavco Cup

"I can make you cry in this room"
Sep 5, 2013
37,630
10,440
It was a comment on command and control management style, which pro sports seems to still subscribe to. I noticed a pattern when discussing Maurice's with someone. As someone pointed out, the same weaknesses that have followed him throughout his career. This is a problem with a lot of HC's in many sports. The job is too wide and too difficult to give 1 person authority and responsibility in all facets of coaching a big league sports team. I think the current definition of a HC is a poor one, and leads to a lot of inefficiency in the field.

There is no need to put all that authority and responsibility with a single person. I have no idea why so many people think it has to work this way. This isn't about consensus building or a democracy; it's about empowering a team of experts with authority and responsibility over their own specialization working as a team. They are free to collaborate. They as a team still answer to someone or something, e.g. measure against KPI's, which everyone is anyways.

A coach who manages the team in game or designs the systems they play or optimizes line up choices doesn't need to be the same person. A HC delagating is far from the same thing, everything still goes through them. Think of the problem domain of running the day to day ops of a hockey team. There are many subdomains of varying importance which make up the larger domain. A HC currently has authority over all those subdomains that apply to coaching/day-to-day player management.

I am not talking about having 3 HC's with equal authority try to duke it out and make a hockey team run.

Perhaps:

Huddy decides D pairs and D ice time
Flaherty decides which goaltender plays
Vincent decides on the PP units and strategies

How do you know this is not the case?
 

pucka lucka

Registered User
Apr 7, 2010
5,913
2,581
Ottawa
Perhaps:

Huddy decides D pairs and D ice time
Flaherty decides which goaltender plays
Vincent decides on the PP units and strategies

How do you know this is not the case?

Ok, how do we know it's not an invisible alligator pulling the strings? Really?
 

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,718
69,048
Winnipeg
It was a comment on command and control management style, which pro sports seems to still subscribe to. I noticed a pattern when discussing Maurice's with someone. As someone pointed out, the same weaknesses that have followed him throughout his career. This is a problem with a lot of HC's in many sports. The job is too wide and too difficult to give 1 person authority and responsibility in all facets of coaching a big league sports team. I think the current definition of a HC is a poor one, and leads to a lot of inefficiency in the field.

There is nstaffd to put all that authority and responsibility with a single person. I have no idea why so many people think it has to work this way. This isn't about consensus building or a democracy; it's about empowering a team of experts with authority and responsibility over their own specialization working as a team. They are free to collaborate. They as a team still answer to someone or something, e.g. measure against KPI's, which everyone is anyways.

A coach who manages the team in game or designs the systems they play or optimizes line up choices doesn't need to be the same person. A HC delagating is far from the same thing, everything still goes through them. Think of the problem domain of running the day to day ops of a hockey team. There are many subdomains of varying importance which make up the larger domain. A HC currently has authority over all those subdomains that apply to coaching/day-to-day player management.

I am not talking about having 3 HC's with equal authority try to duke it out and make a hockey team run.


I now see where you are coming from. You are correct in that in most well functioning teams experts fullfill key individual roles and are measured with regards to KPI's. However there is almost always delegation or placement of said experts into the roles they are best suited for. Moreover while autonomy is by and large a good thing in these situations there is still an overriding goal or objective that the team is tasked to achieve. While KPI help keep the team focused, there is often a member of the team that assumes the mantal of team leader and holds the other members to task when needed.

Its hard to say how much autonomy Maurice allows his staff without being in the room. He could micromanage or he could say here is the way we want to play, go out and make it happen and here are the apecific metrics you will be measured on. We know players are measured on a number of statistical metrics, it stands to reason that the coaching staff would be as well.
 

pucka lucka

Registered User
Apr 7, 2010
5,913
2,581
Ottawa
I now see where you are coming from. You are correct in that in most well functioning teams experts fullfill key individual roles and are measured with regards to KPI's. However there is almost always delegation or placement of said experts into the roles they are best suited for. Moreover while autonomy is by and large a good thing in these situations there is still an overriding goal or objective that the team is tasked to achieve. While KPI help keep the team focused, there is often a member of the team that assumes the mantal of team leader and holds the other members to task when needed.

Its hard to say how much autonomy Maurice allows his staff without being in the room. He could micromanage or he could say here is the way we want to play, go out and make it happen and here are the apecific metrics you will be measured on. We know players are measured on a number of statistical metrics, it stands to reason that the coaching staff would be as well.

I am not even talking about Maurice specifically. As another astute hfjets member said to me if Hitchcock is so brilliant why has he been fired so many times? Likely because he's rather poor at certain aspects of the job, while brilliant at others.

What I am saying has nothing to do with how much autonomy the HC allows. I am questioning the fact he is the one to delegate it at all. Why give a HC the final say in areas they don't have high competency?
 

DEANYOUNGBLOOD17

Registered User
May 10, 2011
3,397
1,348
The Big 10 tourney is thurs march 19 to sat the 21 st... You were right

So if Michigan loses on qtr final on thurs the 19 th or semi final game on the 20 th and do not rank in the top 16 ...... Copp could be available as early as march 22 nd to turn pro

I have always been a Michigan and a UND ( still fighting Souix fan) and hope both teams do well......
 

surixon

Registered User
Jul 12, 2003
48,718
69,048
Winnipeg
I am not even talking about Maurice specifically. As another astute hfjets member said to me if Hitchcock is so brilliant why has he been fired so many times? Likely because he's rather poor at certain aspects of the job, while brilliant at others.

What I am saying has nothing to do with how much autonomy the HC allows. I am questioning the fact he is the one to delegate it at all. Why give a HC the final say in areas they don't have high competency?

It actually does have to do with it. You are saying that a head coach shouldn't make decisions In situations he doesn't have expertise in, which is fair. So then if the Jets say have an assistant coach who has an excellent track record with regards to pk an Paul grants him autonomy to run the pk as he sees fit isn't that what you are arguing for?
 

Gil Fisher

Registered User
Mar 18, 2012
7,649
4,945
Winnipeg
The Big 10 tourney is thurs march 19 to sat the 21 st... You were right

So if Michigan loses on qtr final on thurs the 19 th or semi final game on the 20 th and do not rank in the top 16 ...... Copp could be available as early as march 22 nd to turn pro

I have always been a Michigan and a UND ( still fighting Souix fan) and hope both teams do well......

That would be the same timing as Ehlers if he doesn't make the playoffs. Could be a real boost to the playoff run.*





*Okay, Icecaps' playoff run.
 

DEANYOUNGBLOOD17

Registered User
May 10, 2011
3,397
1,348
Talking about our college prospects turning pro.......

What are the odds of Phillips turning pro this March or returning to Michigan Tech for his senior year next year.

He came out of no where this year with a 1.76 GA and a 0.934 sv% with 4 shut-outs in 32 games this year....

last year in 13 games he had a .892 sv % and a2.82 GA


also talking about Michigan Tech ....Alex Petan is having a great 3rd year of college with 14 goals ...24 assists for 38 pts in 32 games. (all 5-9 180 lbs of him)
 

Romang67

BitterSwede
Jan 2, 2011
29,604
21,716
Evanston, IL
Talking about our college prospects turning pro.......

What are the odds of Phillips turning pro this March or returning to Michigan Tech for his senior year next year.

He came out of no where this year with a 1.76 GA and a 0.934 sv% with 4 shut-outs in 32 games this year....

last year in 13 games he had a .892 sv % and a2.82 GA


also talking about Michigan Tech ....Alex Petan is having a great 3rd year of college with 14 goals ...24 assists for 38 pts in 32 games. (all 5-9 180 lbs of him)

Unless the plan is for Hellebuyck to play in the NHL next season, that would send either Comrie or Phillips to the ECHL full time next season, which I don't think is a good idea.
 

Gil Fisher

Registered User
Mar 18, 2012
7,649
4,945
Winnipeg
Unless the plan is for Hellebuyck to play in the NHL next season, that would send either Comrie or Phillips to the ECHL full time next season, which I don't think is a good idea.

Actually, rotating Comrie and Phillips through Manchester starting gig and the St. John's back up gig could make sense. (Manchester and Ontario are switching leagues right?)
 

ps241

The Ballad of Ville Bobby
Sponsor
Mar 10, 2010
34,828
30,966
It was a comment on command and control management style, which pro sports seems to still subscribe to. I noticed a pattern when discussing Maurice's with someone. As someone pointed out, the same weaknesses that have followed him throughout his career. This is a problem with a lot of HC's in many sports. The job is too wide and too difficult to give 1 person authority and responsibility in all facets of coaching a big league sports team. I think the current definition of a HC is a poor one, and leads to a lot of inefficiency in the field.

There is no need to put all that authority and responsibility with a single person. I have no idea why so many people think it has to work this way. This isn't about consensus building or a democracy; it's about empowering a team of experts with authority and responsibility over their own specialization working as a team. They are free to collaborate. They as a team still answer to someone or something, e.g. measure against KPI's, which everyone is anyways.

A coach who manages the team in game or designs the systems they play or optimizes line up choices doesn't need to be the same person. A HC delagating is far from the same thing, everything still goes through them. Think of the problem domain of running the day to day ops of a hockey team. There are many subdomains of varying importance which make up the larger domain. A HC currently has authority over all those subdomains that apply to coaching/day-to-day player management.

I am not talking about having 3 HC's with equal authority try to duke it out and make a hockey team run.

Thanks your post does a good job of letting me know what you were driving at and giving me more information about what your perceived as strengths and weaknesses are of the current system.

It's an interesting debate. I probably look at hockey ops espcially when it comes to the job of the head coach being more decentralized than you do. The leader is Chevy and he is the GM. Zinger is the "director of hockey operations" and assistant GM, and they also have Larry Simmons who is an assistant GM. Not sure what Zinger's job entitles (director of ops?)

Now we move to the players that the team has. They are generated by the amateur draft, development, trades, and free agent acquisitions (hopefully I didn't miss anything). The Scouting department is divided up into the Director of Pro Scouting (Mark Dobson) and the Director of amateur scouting (Marcel Comeau). Right below Marcel there is a head amateur scout and they have 12 amateur scouts on payroll. They also have a head European Scout (not sure if that is amateur only). On the Pro side under Dobson the have 5 Pro scouts in North America and 1 European based pro scout. They also have a dedicated asset in Barrett Leganchuk with the title "Coordinator, Scouting and Hockey Video". This creates a pretty extensive network and from everything I hear it is a highly collaborative process where independent thinking and conflict are a necessary part of the consensus building. Show up with "your" list of players and be ready to fight for them.

On the player development side Jimmy Roy is the coordinator and Mike Keane is his assistant. They follow the junior and college players development plans. Then of course there is the AHL coaching staff (3 plus a goalie consultant).

To me the process above creates a very dynamic supply side that is pretty divided from the Coach. The old adage is that the GM shops for the groceries and the coach does the cooking.

One of the key points that is up for debate with the current Jets team is how big a roll does a coach like Maurice have on deciding if the Peulso's of the world are in or out of the 23 man roster? I honestly can't tell you how collaborative that is? For all I know it is Chevy who stocks the 23 man roster and PMo does the best he can with it. I do ask myself if he was really married to the current roster why does he staple the 4th line to the bench all the time but I digress. I am sensing this is one of the areas you are talking about with the bolded above.

The day to day hockey team is run by Maurice and he has Huddy and Vincent as his assistants. He has Flarity as his goalie coach, and has Prefountaine as his video coach. From Everything I hear it sounds like Huddy has allot of input into the D, but it's a really small group so without being inside the room it's hard to tell how collaborative it is?

To me the entire structure of hockey ops seems siloed, yet somewhat collaborative by nature but the game day management of the roster is controlled by a much smaller group?

Hey the fact we have had Pavs here for almost 4 seasons has me jumping up and down (pre Maurice)......some of the roster choice challenges around face punchers also don't make me sleep well at night but I just find it hard to point the finger at the coach for it completely or say it is a command and control issue? For all I know it is a highly collaborative process with a ****** outcome and it may be delegating to the wrong people that is the issue (too much autonomy or collaboration)? For all I know it is a top down driven challenge from the owner where Mark says we paid for Pavs and we ain't buying him out so live with it and coach him up?

There are too many variables I don't know enough about to pass judgment on the management format functionality of a pro hockey team? Now that doesn't mean it isn't dam fun to debate about. :laugh:
 
Last edited:

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,187
28,768
Actually, rotating Comrie and Phillips through Manchester starting gig and the St. John's back up gig could make sense. (Manchester and Ontario are switching leagues right?)

Assuming Helle is still in St John's it is the backup job that is available. Not much playing time there so I agree that if Phillips turns pro that kind of rotation is better. Otherwise Comrie should be in the ECHL as a starter. It was that kind of lack of space that got us Hutch. The Bruins simply couldn't find enough ice time for everybody.
 

DEANYOUNGBLOOD17

Registered User
May 10, 2011
3,397
1,348
Assuming Helle is still in St John's it is the backup job that is available. Not much playing time there so I agree that if Phillips turns pro that kind of rotation is better. Otherwise Comrie should be in the ECHL as a starter. It was that kind of lack of space that got us Hutch. The Bruins simply couldn't find enough ice time for everybody.

The solution is to some how rid ourselves of the Pavs problem......... but how
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,187
28,768
The solution is to some how rid ourselves of the Pavs problem......... but how

Buyout this summer is the obvious route but that doesn't solve the problem of getting ice time for our prospects unless Helle is in the NHL next year. That is not a given even with Pav gone. The ECHL is fine for at least 1 year for Comrie & Phillips with each taking a turn backing up Helle in the A.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->