Lost Season- Sun Story

[Holden Caulfield]

I'm looking forward to a lot of talk about fortuitous "coincidence" and "accident" and "luck" in the coming couple of years.

It's funny how everyone always talks about how everything will be different in a couple years. For 5 years now I've heard this ridiculous argument. Moving goalposts tend to be pretty impossible to hit, which makes it perfect for the Chevy supporters of this so called "plan".

 

[Whileee]

You keep using these words to misrepresent what ppl are saying. It's getting old. Saying our GM isn't a good one, while supplying loads of evidence to support it, IS NOT TRASHING THE GM. I am confused, are you are here to defend his honour?

Red Herring? You aren't really interested in a discussion are you? We had better players than Scheifele, Ehlers and Connor in WInnipeg before. It guarantees nothing. We had a top possession team last year who made the playoffs with a league worst goaltender, BLOW IT UP! SOLID PLAN CHEVY!

If you don't think that Chevy gets "trashed" here, then you're not paying attention. It's not just talking rationally about his mistakes, it's the steady stream of various irrelevant criticisms. It conveys an irrational and emotional component to the criticism ("ditherer", "useless", "inept", etc.) I'll use "criticizing" in the future, to lower the emotional temperature of our discourse.

I think Chevy was right to "blow it up", if by that you mean continue to move beyond the core and bring in more youth. I said it at the time, and have been consistent since then. I didn't think the core was good enough, and I stand by that assessment.

Whilee your conflating long term success with short term. Chevy didn't have to have such a mediocre team for the first five years in order to build a sustainable draft and develop model. That'd the whole point. Further... Chevy's inability to fix easily remedied bottom of the roster issues only begs the question of how good can we really be in the future when the kids are ready? If he can't properly put a team together now with wheeler buff little Ladd frolik Enstrom etc... What makes us think he can when our new core is ready to step up??

I'm not "conflating" long and short term success, I'm saying that I don't think that making moves to improve short-term success would have made much difference in the longer term, and could have derailed the longer term strategy if they had made significant short term moves. A very good example was the decision to trade Ladd, instead of meeting his contract demands. If the Jets thought they had a championship caliber core, they would have opened the wallet and signed Ladd and Frolik and Stempniak, and maybe traded a prospect or two to bring in a good LHD. They would have had real problems within the next 2-3 years with the salary cap, but they would have been building on last season. I think that would have been a big mistake, because I don't think this team had the basis for a long-term contender. They bit the bullet and went young this year, while holding firm with Ladd and eventually trading him to build for the future. That's an example of sticking with the philosophy, but also making an assessment of what the team has. The Jets have now also built very good depth. They did it with their own picks and young prospects that they traded for. To me, that's the right way to do it. At some point you need to transition to that group, which is starting now.

 

[Aavco Cup]

I think you are lost. Check the thread...

My post was quoted. It was about the Kane trade. I'm not lost

 

[Whileee]

It's funny how everyone always talks about how everything will be different in a couple years. For 5 years now I've heard this ridiculous argument. Moving goalposts tend to be pretty impossible to hit, which makes it perfect for the Chevy supporters of this so called "plan".

I respect your opinion, but I don't think I've moved goalposts. I have consistently thought that a good foundation for a contender can't be built within 5 years, and I've said that plenty in the past. I've also said that I think Chevy has made some mistakes and could have moved more quickly, but that he's done a pretty good job of building the roster and prospect pool.

What I find fascinating is the pivoting that we are now seeing whereby the critics are now ascribing the positive developments to everything except competency.

How long would you say it took the Kings to rebuild for their championship team? They drafted Doughty at #2 after 5 years out of the playoffs.

 

[pucka lucka]

I respect your opinion, but I don't think I've moved goalposts. I have consistently thought that a good foundation for a contender can't be built within 5 years, and I've said that plenty in the past. I've also said that I think Chevy has made some mistakes and could have moved more quickly, but that he's done a pretty good job of building the roster and prospect pool.

What I find fascinating is the pivoting that we are now seeing whereby the critics are now ascribing the positive developments to everything except competency.

How long would you say it took the Kings to rebuild for their championship team? They drafted Doughty at #2 after 5 years out of the playoffs.

You just accused people critical of Chevy as pivoting? That's a fascinating bizarre take not rooted in reality. Please name these posters. There is not club that allows you to refer to these ppl as a group.

 

[Eyeseeing]

It's funny how everyone always talks about how everything will be different in a couple years. For 5 years now I've heard this ridiculous argument. Moving goalposts tend to be pretty impossible to hit, which makes it perfect for the Chevy supporters of this so called "plan".

If and when we have success , some will hail Chevy and this plan.
I know if I were a season ticket holder I'd be getting pretty po'd about now.
We are likely going to finish anywhere from 25-30th and will likely trot out the same bad starting goal tender and 3 loyalty contracts that take up valuable roster space .
Do we really think we will all the sudden become a contender , like really ?
How often do teams climb out of the cellar to become solid contenders ?
I guess if these young players everyone is counting on lives up to their potential we may improve but not by leaps and bounds , especially when the then 6 year old problems will still be on our roster.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

I respect your opinion, but I don't think I've moved goalposts. I have consistently thought that a good foundation for a contender can't be built within 5 years, and I've said that plenty in the past. I've also said that I think Chevy has made some mistakes and could have moved more quickly, but that he's done a pretty good job of building the roster and prospect pool.

What I find fascinating is the pivoting that we are now seeing whereby the critics are now ascribing the positive developments to everything except competency.

How long would you say it took the Kings to rebuild for their championship team? They drafted Doughty at #2 after 5 years out of the playoffs.

Never said you specifically. Just in general I've seen this "things will change soon" argument way too many times. It's a ridiculous argument that constantly has it's goalposts changing. Remember the "5 year plan"?

I've never "pivoted". I've basically always said Chevy has mostly ok in his actual transactions. But that he lacks any kind of vision to bring it together to build a winner. That has not changed at all.

Kings did not try to start to rebuild until after their GM change (just before the 06-07 season). Even then Lombardi was told to try to win in year 1, if was only really after 06-07 that the Kings board allowed Lombardi to start to rebuild and built the team his way.

There was good will and lots of assets for Chevy to do the EXACT SAME starting in 2011-12. Either Chevy didn't have the guts or the board didn't, but it has been a failure of management that in 5 years they have failed to set out a plan. Trying to outdraft the rest of league does not qualify as a plan.

 

[Whileee]

You just accused people critical of Chevy as pivoting? That's a fascinating bizarre take is not routed in reality. Please name these posters. There is not club that allows you to refer to these ppl as a group.

I noticed that you didn't call out the poster who accused Chevy's "supporters" of "moving the goalposts".

The "pivoting" comment was directed at posters who regularly labeled Chevy as a "ditherer" who couldn't make a "real trade" because he didn't have his "big boy pants" on, and other such drivel. After making the huge Kane / Bogo trade and then the proactive Ladd trade that narrative is a bit stale, so now the narrative is that he was "forced" or this wasn't part of a "plan". There were also plenty of posters questioning whether Chevy was actually effective at building up the prospect pool, but now that it does indeed look like he's done a good job, we hear that he got "fortunate" or "lucky", or that it's not his work that is responsible but his scouting staff. I don't think it's necessary to single out individual posters, so I'll keep it general thanks.

 

[White Out 403*]

I noticed that you didn't call out the poster who accused Chevy's "supporters" of "moving the goalposts".

The "pivoting" comment was directed at posters who regularly labeled Chevy as a "ditherer" who couldn't make a "real trade" because he didn't have his "big boy pants" on, and other such drivel. After making the huge Kane / Bogo trade and then the proactive Ladd trade that narrative is a bit stale, so now the narrative is that he was "forced" or this wasn't part of a "plan". There were also plenty of posters questioning whether Chevy was actually effective at building up the prospect pool, but now that it does indeed look like he's done a good job, we hear that he got "fortunate" or "lucky", or that it's not his work that is responsible but his scouting staff. I don't think it's necessary to single out individual posters, so I'll keep it general thanks.

He was forced to make the Kane deal. I mean.. really? Are you suggesting his hand wasn't forced?

And no, no one is saying he's fortunate to have the prospect pool. He simply didn't do the majority of that work. His scouts did.

 

[pucka lucka]

I noticed that you didn't call out the poster who accused Chevy's "supporters" of "moving the goalposts".

The "pivoting" comment was directed at posters who regularly labeled Chevy as a "ditherer" who couldn't make a "real trade" because he didn't have his "big boy pants" on, and other such drivel. After making the huge Kane / Bogo trade and then the proactive Ladd trade that narrative is a bit stale, so now the narrative is that he was "forced" or this wasn't part of a "plan". There were also plenty of posters questioning whether Chevy was actually effective at building up the prospect pool, but now that it does indeed look like he's done a good job, we hear that he got "fortunate" or "lucky", or that it's not his work that is responsible but his scouting staff. I don't think it's necessary to single out individual posters, so I'll keep it general thanks.

You are framing a large unconnected group of people in a way that suits your whatever point it is you are attempting to make. I am sure ppl said those things. How is that fact relevant to any other posts?

 

[Whileee]

Never said you specifically. Just in general I've seen this "things will change soon" argument way too many times. It's a ridiculous argument that constantly has it's goalposts changing. Remember the "5 year plan"?

I've never "pivoted". I've basically always said Chevy has mostly ok in his actual transactions. But that he lacks any kind of vision to bring it together to build a winner. That has not changed at all.

Kings did not try to start to rebuild until after their GM change (just before the 06-07 season). Even then Lombardi was told to try to win in year 1, if was only really after 06-07 that the Kings board allowed Lombardi to start to rebuild and built the team his way.

There was good will and lots of assets for Chevy to do the EXACT SAME starting in 2011-12. Either Chevy didn't have the guts or the board didn't, but it has been a failure of management that in 5 years they have failed to set out a plan. Trying to outdraft the rest of league does not qualify as a plan.

They were a bit slow, but I don't think that they've just tried to "outdraft" the rest of the league. They've added the equivalent of 5 extra 1st round picks over 6 years - basically what they've added the value of 10 extra 2nd round picks.

 

[pucka lucka]

They were a bit slow, but I don't think that they've just tried to "outdraft" the rest of the league. They've added the equivalent of 5 extra 1st round picks over 6 years - basically what they've added the value of 10 extra 2nd round picks.

Extra? are you subtracting, Kane, Frolik, and Bogosian from your spurious draft analysis.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

I noticed that you didn't call out the poster who accused Chevy's "supporters" of "moving the goalposts".

The "pivoting" comment was directed at posters who regularly labeled Chevy as a "ditherer" who couldn't make a "real trade" because he didn't have his "big boy pants" on, and other such drivel. After making the huge Kane / Bogo trade and then the proactive Ladd trade that narrative is a bit stale, so now the narrative is that he was "forced" or this wasn't part of a "plan". There were also plenty of posters questioning whether Chevy was actually effective at building up the prospect pool, but now that it does indeed look like he's done a good job, we hear that he got "fortunate" or "lucky", or that it's not his work that is responsible but his scouting staff. I don't think it's necessary to single out individual posters, so I'll keep it general thanks.

I labelled Chevy a ditherer and would be interested to know how I'm "pivoting". What would you call a manager that waits 3 years to trade Evander Kane after requesting a trade every year - and even then only trading him after the circus turned into a national media scandal and he put himself on the IR? What phase of the plan was that?

What would you call a manager who still has Ondrej Pavelec as the starter in year 5, going into year 6, when most teams would have bought him out two years ago or more and virtually every team would have replaced him as their starter? His plan to improve goaltending seems to hinge on drafting a kid from the Odessa Jackelopes in the 5th round of 2012 and then praying that he becomes a world beater in 2017. Does that sound like a man of action to you? The Ladd trade was proactive? What was Andrew Ladd worth at 26 years old with years left on his contract in 2013? Atlanta was the laughingstock of the league because they waited to trade Hossa and Kovalchuk as UFAs on expiring contracts - decisions that set them back years. When Chevy does it with Ladd after trying to sign him for 8 months, it's proactive?

Finally, can you name a team in the last 40 years that misses the playoffs for 8 years, makes it in and then starts to rebuild that offseason?

 

[Holden Caulfield]

They were a bit slow, but I don't think that they've just tried to "outdraft" the rest of the league. They've added the equivalent of 5 extra 1st round picks over 6 years - basically what they've added the value of 10 extra 2nd round picks.

In reality you don't back count prospects. They've made 6 first round picks. 10 picks in top 2 rounds. 38 picks (7.6 per draft). That's not adding picks.

They've added what in prospects, Armia, Dano and Lemieux? Two solid prospects and a marginal one. Maybe an extra longshot if you want to count Blomqvist. That's not adding on lots of youth.

Look at how LA or Chicago drafted. They did alot more than that. They managed to land a bunch of homeruns thanks to giving themselves those odds.

Another thing to add to this is that acquiring players later than draft ends the possibility of that homerun. Since if they had developed like that the teams would never have traded them. So while nice to think about having "extra" first rounders in Armia and Dano (whom I both really like btw) the homerun aspect of it was already out the window by the time you can acquire a player like that.

 

[Whileee]

In reality you don't back count prospects. They've made 6 first round picks. 10 picks in top 2 rounds. 38 picks (7.6 per draft). That's not adding picks.

They've added what in prospects, Armia, Dano and Lemieux? Two solid prospects and a marginal one. Maybe an extra longshot if you want to count Blomqvist. That's not adding on lots of youth.

Look at how LA or Chicago drafted. They did alot more than that. They managed to land a bunch of homeruns thanks to giving themselves those odds.

Another thing to add to this is that acquiring players later than draft ends the possibility of that homerun. Since if they had developed like that the teams would never have traded them. So while nice to think about having "extra" first rounders in Armia and Dano (whom I both really like btw) the homerun aspect of it was already out the window by the time you can acquire a player like that.

How do you not "back count prospects"? Trading for already drafted prospects might actually be a more effective process than trading for future picks because there is more time to evaluate and less uncertainty. They also added two more 1st round picks (equivalent of 4 extra 2nd rounders). You might think Lemieux is a marginal prospect - the Jets don't agree, so from a their perspective that's an important value acquisition.

Regarding "home runs", how many late round picks would it take for you to trade Dano or Armia? I'm pretty sure they could get a whole passel for either of them. Should the Jets use extra 1st rounders to trade down for extra later round picks? It's an interesting philosophy. I'm not sure what the best approach would be, to be honest.

 

[Whileee]

Extra? are you subtracting, Kane, Frolik, and Bogosian from your spurious draft analysis.

Are you not able to communicate without using terms like "spurious"?

The issue was that the Jets should have rebuilt by trading core players for picks. My point is that they did that, and the evidence is that when they traded core players (Kane, Bogo and Ladd) they ended up with a bunch of prospects / picks (along with Myers and Stafford).

I'm going to focus on the Michigan game now. Connor just tied it up in the 3rd, to go with his 2 assists. Plan or no plan, this is getting good.

 

[JetsFan815]

Yes!!!! he added to our prospect pool at three different ages with that trade. Then went on a yourh movement after making the playoffs. It's not preposterous. It's highly more probable than the other theory, that he just bumbled his way into it.

The real point I was trying to make was that it was stealthy. Nobody noticed.

It is preposterous to suggest the state we are in right now was the plan when Chevy traded Kane. If you went back in time and ask Chevy if he planned on being a lottery team in 2015-2016 season- he'd laugh at you. Give him credit for adding to the prospect pool- that's fine, I have nothing against that. What I have something against is going back now and retroactively rewriting history to say that the state we are in right now was part of an elaborate secret plan going as far back as the Kane trade. Perhaps you are right and the plan was so stealthy that even the Jets management didn't know about it

 

[JetsFan815]

Do we really think we will all the sudden become a contender , like really ?
How often do teams climb out of the cellar to become solid contenders ?
I guess if these young players everyone is counting on lives up to their potential we may improve but not by leaps and bounds , especially when the then 6 year old problems will still be on our roster.

This is a very good point that doesn't get mentioned often. If you go to the board any other bottom of the barrel team, the fans of all those teams think that they are building the new "Chicago Blackhawks". All of them are over the moon with their prospect pool and think they'll long term contenders in a few years. Some of these fanbases are going to be very wrong. I just hope it's not us

 

[jiho]

I dont think Chevy has a definite plan. He obviously wanted to keep Kane but was forced to trade him. It sounded like he wanted to resign Frolic but when that fell through, he settled for resigning Stafford. In the summer it appeared Ladd was going to resigned. IMO Ladd did not want to resign but when that did not happen, Chevy settled on resigning Buff.

I am not in the agreement with the direction Chevy has gone. I feel with some good GMing this could of been a playoff team every year. Chevy has done a tremendous job drafting and adding these prospects to the core and some good GMing this could of been a very good team.

I know the argument is going to be that we need a franchise player. It looks like we could luck into that this season. But this was definitely not part of the plan to be 29th or 30th this season.

 

[JetsFan815]

AC never said that, but it's a pretty common strawman argument here.

Start with a strategic plan.... adapt to circumstances as they arise.... make some mistakes and miscalculations along the way.... constantly re-evaluate and make adjustments through iterative planning.... incorporate responses to changing external factors.... etc.

It happens with just about every single organization in a somewhat complex environment. A lot of Chevy critics love to scoff at his constant use of the word "process" to describe what's happening, but building a successful organization does involve process embedded within an overarching strategy / philosophy. That process involves long-range moves and short-term moves, and reacting to changes in the environment. I don't know any effective manager / CEO who doesn't understand that.

AC presented that this was the plan going back as far as the Kane trade which is what I am specifically addressing. I am not creating any strawmen here or expanding the scope of the discussion.

I understand that even the best laid plans change and there needs to be room to improvise. But lets not go back and rewrite history. You are arguing with the wrong person, you seem to think I am some Chevy hater. I am not.

The irritation with the word "process" is that it has become a standin and focusing point of all the frustrations towards Chevy's interviewing style where he talks for 20 minutes but doesn't say anything meaningful and the word "process" is used repeatedly as a nebulous explanation of what's going on

 

[KingBogo]

If and when we have success , some will hail Chevy and this plan.
I know if I were a season ticket holder I'd be getting pretty po'd about now.
We are likely going to finish anywhere from 25-30th and will likely trot out the same bad starting goal tender and 3 loyalty contracts that take up valuable roster space .
Do we really think we will all the sudden become a contender , like really ?
How often do teams climb out of the cellar to become solid contenders ?
I guess if these young players everyone is counting on lives up to their potential we may improve but not by leaps and bounds , especially when the then 6 year old problems will still be on our roster.

I am a ST holder and I'm excited by the future. I've spent 4 1/2 years watching a bubble team that I knew deep down inside never had a hope. Now we are in the "process" of building much more and man I'm happy about that. And by the way which team become a contender without scraping along the bottom first?

 

[Aavco Cup]

It is preposterous to suggest the state we are in right now was the plan when Chevy traded Kane. If you went back in time and ask Chevy if he planned on being a lottery team in 2015-2016 season- he'd laugh at you. Give him credit for adding to the prospect pool- that's fine, I have nothing against that. What I have something against is going back now and retroactively rewriting history to say that the state we are in right now was part of an elaborate secret plan going as far back as the Kane trade. Perhaps you are right and the plan was so stealthy that even the Jets management didn't know about it

What I said was a stealthy rebuild. Never did I mention tank which is what you are describing. There is a difference. I don't for a second believe they were attempting to be at the bottom of the standings.


In addition to the Kane trade and the youth movement I also believe that trading one of Ladd or Buff was definitely part of the plan. Also increasing the prospect pool.

 

[Gil Fisher]

I am a ST holder and I'm excited by the future. I've spent 4 1/2 years watching a bubble team that I knew deep down inside never had a hope. Now we are in the "process" of building much more and man I'm happy about that. And by the way which team become a contender without scraping along the bottom first?

Agree with this. And there has been progress despite the results. This team, when healthy, is far better than the team 3-5 years ago that would go into places like LA, Chi, Ana, and SJ and have to batten down the hatches and hope for a miracle goaltending display to get a point. We can go toe-to-toe with any team in the league now at 5v5 and it's been like that for the better part of two seasons.

 

[Eyeseeing]

I am a ST holder and I'm excited by the future. I've spent 4 1/2 years watching a bubble team that I knew deep down inside never had a hope. Now we are in the "process" of building much more and man I'm happy about that. And by the way which team become a contender without scraping along the bottom first?

It's your money and if that makes you happy that's great seriously.
I just don't see any plan other than what 29 other teams do.
If moves aren't made other than D&D well think Oilers ....
Are you going to be happy then ?

 

[tbcwpg]

It's your money and if that makes you happy that's great seriously.
I just don't see any plan other than what 29 other teams do.
If moves aren't made other than D&D well think Oilers ....
Are you going to be happy then ?

Edmonton's problem has been the later rounds of the draft and some questionable front office decisions, not the first round of the draft.