LTL-Nation,
I'm back for another post, as promised...apologies...
Here is my latest article for Inside Hockey:
http://www.insidehockey.com/columns/6802
Just a few comments, items I can't divulge for a national magazine:
- My very reliable sources told me (cleaning it up, here) that Dineen really, uh, crapped the money bed, during his 2nd interview - he threw off not only an arrogant vibe, but, showed his 'Hitch clone' (true) self.
- Continuing on that point, was the asymmetric fit between his (Dineen's) vision for the team - gritty, firery - vs. Scott Howson's vision. If you need further evidence on that vision, look at the types of players Howson's (and Don Boyd) has drafted: Voracek, Filatov, Moore, Golboeuf.
- Another point to keep in mind: His suspension, last season, for the Portland Pirates. It's one thing to show fire, but another to show a lack of control and leadership, in a crisis. This is the NHL, you're not playing in the league, anymore.
- If Dineen was such a valued commodity, don't you think he'd have received a job offer, by now? (TB, ATL)
- On the notion Boucher schooled Scott Howson - Not so sure, personally. Definitely a bit of a slap; however, if you're Boucher, and you have new ownership, willing to spend money (not our tightwads, here), a new GM whose legacy personifies "Street Cred", 3 stud, speed forwards (Vinny LeCavlier, Martin St. Louis, Steve Stamkos - hey Niki, wonder which one of you will turn out to be the better pro? Thought we forgot about that comment, huh?) , 2 stud offensive D-Men (Hedman, Ohlund) - in short, a far better fit for his system, one in need of a lesser overhaul than our plodding types - a 4-year contract offer, which offer would YOU take? I thought so...
- What I WILL question, on the subject of being schooled, is this: Was it short-sightedness to not offer a 4-year package? Was it short-sighted to not consider other teams might be 'in play'? Was it short-sighted to not ease the 'no movement clause' (if Boucher had designs of opting for the Habs, a year or two, later) , if that were, indeed, a subject of discussion? We'll never really know, not having all the details of both team's offers.
- From the early returns - Arniel's maiden presser, his apparent synergy with Scott Howson's vision and temperment, his reputation as a coach and character as a person (folks I know who've played for him, against him, and with him, BTW, I've yet to hear nothing short of flattering praise) - when it's all 'said and done', maybe this will have been the right choice, after all. Scott Howson, being a 2nd choice for GM, turned out pretty well, didn't it?
Again, when it's post-season, and during the months before the pucks drops - 100 days until training camp starts, BTW - hope springs eternal. So, my view is, let's give Scott Arniel a chance to succeed - either way, it's going to take a Long-Term overhaul to implement a direction that's in sync with the "New NHL" (gawd, I hate that cliche`!).
Go (the) 2 Scott's!
Go Jackets!
- Mase1
