What Is "The Culture" And How Do You Fix It?

ThisIsMyAlibi

Fantilli&Werenski&Gaudreau&Laine&Johnson&Jiricek
Mar 16, 2010
1,877
1,306
Ohio
It’s a disaster from the top down and starts with the trust fund owner. The faux cup run from a couple years ago looks worse with each passing week. Celebrating just making the playoffs is embarrassing. Allowing the GM to do his tough guy act and run every talented player out of town is unconscionable.

Nothing will change until the team is sold (hopefully) to a competent owner.

but I’m sure he’s a nice guy!
 
Last edited:

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
I know Jarmo has talked about using the 'hammer' and I agree that this is something that needs to go away. Hopefully he has learned and will keep these discussions out of the media. But honestly, when I think back, I'm glad he used the 'hammer' in many of these negotiations, like with Johansen.

The only one I wish he'd done differently is Josh Anderson. I felt he was underpaid and forced into a 3 year deal. He had done enough to merit a 1 or or 2 year contract if they were holding firm on the bridge. Give me another RFA that you felt was unfairly punished by Jarmo in RFA negotiations, maybe I'm forgetting someone. Bjork, Jones, Werenski, Gavrikov, Korpi, Elvis all seem like fair contracts that there wasn't a lot of angst over (yes, I remember ZW negotiation went a little prolonged).

This is an interesting observation.

The Anderson negotiation in 2017 is where I felt like we were screwing one of our RFAs. I think I was the one poster complaining about it at the time. In any case, I don't know of any other instances where we screwed somebody, I don't know enough and nothing egregious like that came to light. I'm just sort of generalizing based on that instance and the Athletic article where the vets said they were too tough on RFAs.

I was upset on a couple instances where Torts weighed in against the RFA player in the midst of the negotiation (e.g. Werenski), which to my mind is crossing an important boundary. I'm not sure if Jarmo was a part of that, or opposed to it, who knows.

Coming off his ELC they hammered him down into taking less money on a bridge "prove it" deal. Then, in a contract year, he was seriously injured. Then the Jackets cited his injury and low numbers that season as a reason why they weren't willing to offer him the $7 million x 7 years deal he wanted. That fed into a feeling of a lack of loyalty from the team.

- It made sense in 2017 for Anderson to take a "prove-it" deal. And he was willing! That was the issue, he was willing to take a 1 year deal at near league minimum and Jarmo said no, three years or you don't play. That's not a prove it deal.

- In the 2020 negotiation, Anderson's ask was $5.5m x 7. Exactly what Montreal gave him. Jarmo offered $5m x 7, which ought to have been enough, but Anderson wasn't in a mood for giving any discounts.
 

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,078
24,005
After thinking about it, I think the culture at the top (organizationally) is what needs addressed first.

I hope to my core that after all of these talented players leaving, for whatever variety of reasons they left, has finally woken up Jarmo and JD to change their management styles. It's one thing to lose players to things you can't do anything about (Panarin wanting a bigger city, Duchene dead set on Nashville) and its another thing to literally drive away talent for a variety of reasons. Not to re-hash, because each situation is different and we all know these stories, but there is no reason for negotiations to go public and hostile (Anderson, Johansen), there's no reason to poison relationships (Bobrovsky, Anderson again), and SOMETHING happened with PLD. We don't know exactly what (other than unconfirmed speculation) but something happened, and if the team had any hand in it, then he belongs at the top of the group.

Just because you have "the hammer" in negotiations doesn't mean you should use it. At least not all the time. Jarmo and JD seem to believe that "since we have the hammer the first time, we take advantage of you, and when you have it you take advantage of us." when the actual scenario that happens is they take advantage of the player, the player gets pissed, and the relationship either ends early or when the time comes the player just tells them to screw off and walks. This isn't healthy. Good faith negotiating doesn't have to be this way, yet they actively choose it and are almost openly proud of it. I get we're a small market team and the McConnell's probably don't want to spend money they don't have to, but is "winning" every RFA negotiation worth poisoning the relationship and making it end early?

Jones alluded to "something" is deterring players from playing here and stressed it wasn't the city. Who knows what he's talking about. I'm not in the locker room, obviously, but I do think there is a lack of personality in the group (which is why we see Elvis as such a breath of fresh air) which might make playing here pretty boring. When you think about it, we have some really dull/boring players to listen to (Jenner, Werenski, Jones, Korpi, and Laine all feel like robots when they speak) and I get that we're just seeing a window into their personality, but they are seriously the most dry humans ever sometimes.

As far as in the locker room. I think the start of the new culture begins with the coach. Say what you will about Torts, and I got annoyed with it plenty of times, but holding everyone accountable to the same standard and enforcing it IS the best way to lead a team. Nobody should be above the team. Now was Torts a bit too hard handed sometimes? Yeah, especially with young players. But it seems Jarmo and JD want something like that in the next coach, and I agree with it. If Laine, Jones, Texier, or Stenlund deserve to get benched, then they should all get benched.

I don't know who the locker room leaders are, but judging from the end of season meeting group the "leaders" are Jones, Bjorkstrand, Nyquist, Jenner, Cam, and Werenski. Werenski was newly added into the group at the end of the year so he's still a bit green to leading, and obviously Jones won't be here in October. Unless Nick Foligno is re-signed in the offseason, I firmly expect Jenner to be the next captain with Bjorkstrand and Cam as the A's (maybe Bjork and Nyquist rotate A's).
 
Last edited:

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
Jones alluded to "something" is deterring players from playing here and stressed it wasn't the city. Who knows what he's talking about. I'm not in the locker room, obviously, but I do think there is a lack of personality in the group (which is why we see Elvis as such a breath of fresh air) which might make playing here pretty boring. When you think about it, we have some really dull/boring players to listen to (Jenner, Werenski, Jones, Korpi, and Laine all feel like robots when they speak) and I get that we're just seeing a window into their personality, but they are seriously the most dry humans ever sometimes.

If you find a team that isn't full of boring hockey players, let me know. I've looked all over the league and I don't think such a thing exists.

But I'll also say that is more about being boring in front of the media. You wouldn't know what a wild man David Savard was from listening to the pressers.

I don't know who the locker room leaders are, but judging from the end of season meeting group the "leaders" are Jones, Bjorkstrand, Nyquist, Jenner, Cam, and Werenski. Werenski was newly added into the group at the end of the year so he's still a bit green to leading, and obviously Jones won't be here in October. Unless Nick Foligno is re-signed in the offseason, I firmly expect Jenner to be the next captain with Bjorkstrand and Cam as the A's (maybe Bjork and Nyquist rotate A's).

Bjorkstrand and Jenner are easily the best on-ice leaders we have. They have the excellent demeanor and consistent effort that you want. They're also maybe the two quietest guys on the team.

Cam is vocal. He's also moody as heck and a different player from game to game.

I could see Z growing into a leader if he commits to the team.

As far as in the locker room. I think the start of the new culture begins with the coach. Say what you will about Torts, and I got annoyed with it plenty of times, but holding everyone accountable to the same standard and enforcing it IS the best way to lead a team. Nobody should be above the team. Now was Torts a bit too hard handed sometimes? Yeah, especially with young players. But it seems Jarmo and JD want something like that in the next coach, and I agree with it. If Laine, Jones, Texier, or Stenlund deserve to get benched, then they should all get benched.

So you've made a similar dichotomy to me - where culture as an issue is an FO thing and a locker room thing. And with the FO, I agree they've got to build loyalty and to do that you have to sacrifice something when you don't actually have to (with RFAs).

For the locker room, that's mostly just a matter of player personnel. In 2012 the Jackets shipped out some not good locker room voices and brought in some great locker room voices. In the beginning it was Johnson, Dubinsky, Foligno, Prospal, Letestu. Those are the guys that killed the country club.

So I hate to say it but if you think culture amongst the players is an issue - not just in terms of loyalty to Columbus, but their team play and their effort and professional orientation - then you've got to look at personnel. Everyone already knows who I think are the bad teammates. So I won't waste time there. I don't think any coach is going to fix it if he doesn't have the right guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBJWerenski8

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,078
24,005
So I hate to say it but if you think culture amongst the players is an issue - not just in terms of loyalty to Columbus, but their team play and their effort and professional orientation - then you've got to look at personnel. Everyone already knows who I think are the bad teammates. So I won't waste time there. I don't think any coach is going to fix it if he doesn't have the right guys.

I guess that depends on how bad Jarmo believes the "bad apples" are. Are they too far gone? Or can they change in the right environment, with the right coach, and the right teammates. Which again stresses the importance of the coach hiring and making sure the right guy is picked. Because if you hang onto the bad apples and have a bad coach, its going to spoil the whole batch and make the rebuild even more painful.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
I guess that depends on how bad Jarmo believes the "bad apples" are. Are they too far gone? Or can they change in the right environment, with the right coach, and the right teammates. Which again stresses the importance of the coach hiring and making sure the right guy is picked. Because if you hang onto the bad apples and have a bad coach, its going to spoil the whole batch and make the rebuild even more painful.

Bad teammates will kill you whether you have a good coach or not.

Boston has been the winningest team of the last two decades. And they're the bozos who ship good players out in a hurry if they don't think they're right in the room. See Seguin, Hamilton, etc... Bad trade returns too, and they just keep on winning.
 

JacketsDavid

Registered User
Jan 11, 2013
2,640
882
I agree winning would help. But for the players more important is the respect. These guys have continually see their peers get "the hammer" dropped on them by the front office while RFA.
I still come back to it's about treating the players right (and I stick with giving them great amenities). This comes from ownership which didn't have the money to repair the arena.
For a while this has to be built thru the draft and our young players. Treat those players right. Not like commodities. THat doesn't mean overpay everyone, but certainly do better than we have in the past when a lot of the talented guys are eager to get out.
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,520
1,396
Ohio
Bad teammates will kill you whether you have a good coach or not.

Boston has been the winningest team of the last two decades. And they're the bozos who ship good players out in a hurry if they don't think they're right in the room. See Seguin, Hamilton, etc... Bad trade returns too, and they just keep on winning.
Another example of a top down culture. Jeremy Jacobs provides the vision of who the Bruins are. GMs change, coaches change, and the team keeps winning. Yes there was a 4-5 year re-build that culminated in a Cup. Players stay there, and players who aren't "Bruins" aren't there long.
 

koteka

Registered User
Jan 1, 2017
3,813
4,163
Central Ohio
I agree winning would help. But for the players more important is the respect. These guys have continually see their peers get "the hammer" dropped on them by the front office while RFA.
I still come back to it's about treating the players right (and I stick with giving them great amenities). This comes from ownership which didn't have the money to repair the arena.
For a while this has to be built thru the draft and our young players. Treat those players right. Not like commodities. THat doesn't mean overpay everyone, but certainly do better than we have in the past when a lot of the talented guys are eager to get out.

This is interesting. Because they might have one of the league’s most hated players in Marchand, but he is the kind of guy you might love in the room and laugh at his antics.

But this is why culture is hard to judge. Unless you are on a team, you really don’t know who is a good teammate.

A guy could be mildly hurt and sitting out and the teammates don’t like him and the media leaves him alone. Or he might have a painful injury and be gutting it out and impressing the room while the fans think he sucks. He might have hit on your girlfriend. Or he might have helped you out when you got yourself in a bad situation. A guy might be told in a team meeting the strategy is to do A and not B and he does B on every shift. This season, someone on the team might have given you COVID.

Discussing culture from the outside really doesn’t make much sense to me. I do hope they look at it from the inside.
 

Monk

Registered User
Feb 5, 2008
7,496
5,393
A guy could be mildly hurt and sitting out and the teammates don’t like him and the media leaves him alone. Or he might have a painful injury and be gutting it out and impressing the room while the fans think he sucks. He might have hit on your girlfriend. Or he might have helped you out when you got yourself in a bad situation. A guy might be told in a team meeting the strategy is to do A and not B and he does B on every shift. This season, someone on the team might have given you COVID.
.

This is exactly why I think it would be a mistake to trade Laine before next season. Or even Domi tbh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: koteka

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,611
4,124
This is an interesting observation.

The Anderson negotiation in 2017 is where I felt like we were screwing one of our RFAs. I think I was the one poster complaining about it at the time. In any case, I don't know of any other instances where we screwed somebody, I don't know enough and nothing egregious like that came to light. I'm just sort of generalizing based on that instance and the Athletic article where the vets said they were too tough on RFAs.

I was upset on a couple instances where Torts weighed in against the RFA player in the midst of the negotiation (e.g. Werenski), which to my mind is crossing an important boundary. I'm not sure if Jarmo was a part of that, or opposed to it, who knows.



- It made sense in 2017 for Anderson to take a "prove-it" deal. And he was willing! That was the issue, he was willing to take a 1 year deal at near league minimum and Jarmo said no, three years or you don't play. That's not a prove it deal.

- In the 2020 negotiation, Anderson's ask was $5.5m x 7. Exactly what Montreal gave him. Jarmo offered $5m x 7, which ought to have been enough, but Anderson wasn't in a mood for giving any discounts.
You're right, I should have said bridge. But IIRC his initial ask was 7x7 and he came down to 5.5x7. I'm not sure what the Jackets initial offer was but I'd assume it was below 5x7.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
You're right, I should have said bridge. But IIRC his initial ask was 7x7 and he came down to 5.5x7. I'm not sure what the Jackets initial offer was but I'd assume it was below 5x7.

I don't care much for initial asks and initial offers. They're often ridiculous. I want to know where people are at when they get serious.
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,611
4,124
I don't care much for initial asks and initial offers. They're often ridiculous. I want to know where people are at when they get serious.
Sure but if a player takes the initial offer from the Jackets as ridiculously low or the Jackets just say "no" to the player's initial offer, then that impacts the feeling of a lack of loyalty from the team.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
Sure but if a player takes the initial offer from the Jackets as ridiculously low or the Jackets just say "no" to the player's initial offer, then that impacts the feeling of a lack of loyalty from the team.

That's true. I was thinking more from the agent's end. His first ask I don't care about.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
This is exactly why I think it would be a mistake to trade Laine before next season. Or even Domi tbh.

It should be "exactly why we wouldn't be the best ones to judge". There's nothing in koteka's comment that speaks to Laine or Domi in particular, only that others will have a better window into that than we would. I'll acknowledge that and say that in principle it is important to remove bad teammates from the room, whoever that might be.
 

Monk

Registered User
Feb 5, 2008
7,496
5,393
It should be "exactly why we wouldn't be the best ones to judge". There's nothing in koteka's comment that speaks to Laine or Domi in particular, only that others will have a better window into that than we would. I'll acknowledge that and say that in principle it is important to remove bad teammates from the room, whoever that might be.

Or "even those in the room shouldn't make such judgements off this extremely weird season with a ton of variables and unanswered questions, one in which we know Laine was injured." Which is what I meant by my initial post. Obv nobody here is in a position to actually do that decision making
 
  • Like
Reactions: LJ7201

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,655
Or "even those in the room shouldn't make such judgements off this extremely weird season with a ton of variables and unanswered questions, one in which we know Laine was injured." Which is what I meant by my initial post. Obv nobody here is in a position to actually do that decision making

I think the guys in the room would know.

If he's sluggish because he's congenitally weak, I can relate. :laugh:

If he's sluggish because he was up all night playing video games, then that's just absurdly childish for a pro athlete. Though I can also relate. :laugh:

I repeat - I am not saying I know what it is. I am saying the teammates would probably know the difference.
 

Monk

Registered User
Feb 5, 2008
7,496
5,393
I think the guys in the room would know.

If he's sluggish because he's congenitally weak, I can relate. :laugh:

If he's sluggish because he was up all night playing video games, then that's just absurdly childish for a pro athlete. Though I can also relate. :laugh:

I repeat - I am not saying I know what it is. I am saying the teammates would probably know the difference.

Know what?
 

koteka

Registered User
Jan 1, 2017
3,813
4,163
Central Ohio
One thing I have noticed is Canadians generally seem to like Columbus. I know many Canadians in Columbus. Guys like Jody Shelley, Rick Nash, Derek Dorsett, and Jean-Luc Grand-Pierre have settled here. We assume Foligno will settle here.
 

Monstershockey

Registered User
Sponsor
Dec 31, 2017
2,791
3,053
Whether someone was giving their all in a difficult circumstance, or was just not trying hard or not being professional.
Judging by your liking of a comment, I assume you are talking about Torts. While I was also disappointed in his approach at coaching this season, he really should have been let out of his contract when he told Jarmo he wanted let out of his contract. He knew he didn't fit and it wasn't going to work. He let Jarmo know right after the bubble giving Columbus the whole off season to either hire a guy that fits, or slap an interim tag on Larson and give him a 56 game trial to see what he has, and to start moving in the direction they want to go. Instead the forced a guy that didn't want to be there to coach a team that was opposite of what they were originally trying to build. In turn, they wasted a year, a perfect year to analyze your players, and possibly caused a couple of guys change their mind on playing here.

We would already be one year into a retool/rebuild, but instead we are just starting. If they hire Larsen, then it turns into even more of a waste because we would already have gotten a good look at him for 56 games.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->