GhostofPotvin29
New member
Per Darren Dreger, Columbus has fired Todd Richards and replaced him with......John Tortorella.
Columbus fires Richards, hires Tortorella
- Thread starter GhostofPotvin29
- Start date
No surprise here, Richards was definitely done. I think that Columbus actually has a pretty good roster for a coach like Tortorella. A lot of gritty guys and such.
And as per Elliotte Friedmam Columbus has to give Vancouver a draft pick for some reason.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
http://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/656824393591472128
Columbus was a top-10 team in Corsi this season, dead last in PDO. So they'll improve under Torts, but it might not matter. Yesterday someone wrote that they basically need to play .600 hockey from here on out to even have a chance at the playoffs. Crazy what a terrible start like that can do to a team.
Frank E said:
It's a 2nd round pick too because Torts was hired during the season. That's the 2nd worst trade of assets they've pulled off this year.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
CarltonTheBear said:
The way they've started that's basically a late 1st at this point. More than they got for Eddie Lack!
L K said:
It becomes even crazier when you make the hiring during the season and the pick goes up. Again, I get the intent. If you lose an assistant coach during the season to a team who wants him as a head coach you need to replace that person on your staff and you should get compensated more. That's the intent. But that doesn't relate to this situation in any way.
Potvin29 said:
Oh yeah that's actually the best trade Vancouver's made in awhile.
Of course all this complaining about compensation will go away once someone hires Randy during the season. Please. Anybody.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
CarltonTheBear said:
I guess Columbus has the option of waiting until June 1 to decide if it's a 2016, 2017 or 2018 pick.
WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
Rumor had him being mentioned in Ducks circles.
I think he'll replace Hartley should the Flames continue to look ropey.
Kin
New member
Yeah, I'm still going to look at any situation like this and think that it's a perfect example of why the rule exists. These teams are competitors. Giving up a 2nd for Tortorella seems crazy to me but if Columbus genuinely thinks he's worth that that then it raises the obvious question of why a club should feel obligated to let someone they're paying, someone who they still have under contract, help a competitor.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Nik the Trik said:
Wouldn't it be an issue of it being unreasonable to prevent someone from working in their field? Tortorella was fired 538 days ago. In this case, I see that Vancouver is still paying some of his salary while he goes to Columbus, so I can see being compensated for that. But if it was a scenario where they wouldn't still be paying salary once he took the new position I don't know that compensation should be paid.
Kin
New member
Potvin29 said:
I don't think so. I think that anyone who signs a three or five or eight contract with a team(or anyone, for that matter) enters into such an arrangement being aware of what that means both in terms of good things and bad. You're trading a degree of freedom for job security.
Especially because it's not really preventing Tortorella from working "in his field". If Tortorella wanted to work in the SEL or CHL or NCAA he could without draft pick compensation. He's just subject to compensation if he chooses to work for one of the 29 direct competitors of the Canucks.
WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
Potvin29 said:
That's my take on it, it's similar to the introduction of the Bosman ruling in European football.
You can't restrict a person's right to work.