Ignorance is not bliss

My biggest problem with Jack Capuano is not, contrary to what someone might think given my tendency to harp on his intelligence, that if I asked him who led the team in ice time or shots or takeaways or giveaways (let alone something complicated like Corsi or Fenwick) he would DEFINITELY not be able to tell me.  That is completely understandable.  I’ll be the last one to ever criticize that shortcoming considering memory is not my strongest point either.  No one in the ‘Google’ generation should, considering memorized knowledge is becoming less important than the ability to access information through the various avenues that the internet has made available.  My problem is Jack Capuano’s BLATANT REFUSAL TO ALLOW STATISTICS AND ADVANCED METRICS TO INFORM HIS DECISION MAKING AS A MANAGER.  The fact that he can be as ignorant of things as he is in this day and age and still continue to be employed as an NHL Manager is a disgrace not only to himself, but ON THIS BASS ACKWARD ORGANIZATION THAT CONTINUES TO EMPLOY HIM.

“Ah Bunk, shame on ya lad”

“Hopefully that stuff gets taken care of. It’s something that it’s always good to have that stability. Charles has provided that for a long time. If there’s a change, there’s a change, but I know how much he’s invested in this team and this organization, and we’re looking forward to the future.” – John Tavaers, New York Islanders Captain

I hate that John Tavares said that. That Charles Wang has provided ‘stability’ for the Islanders over the years is certainly a true and indisputable fact, but stable is a tricky word.  Merriam-Webster defines stable as ‘firmly established, not changing or fluctuating’.  Normally that would be great… In the Islanders case it is definitely not great to be stable.  Firmly established as bottom feeders who regularly spend close to, if not the bare minimum on their team every year is not the kind of stable I’m looking for and quite frankly it’s not the kind of stable that a player the caliber of John Tavares should have to settle for on a yearly basis.  I understand the need to be politic when speaking with the media, but I think in this case I would have preferred a ‘no comment’ to this response which is either sugaring of the medicine someone towing the company line or a complete lack of understand of the way the organization works.  The worst part is that I wonder what kind of influence he could exert if he tried being who he is and meaning what he means to this franchise.