Dave, I am a big fan of your posts, they are insightful, objective, and well written. That being said, I don't always agree with everything you say, as would be expected. I am going to attempt to respond to a couple of the points you have made in your last few posts in a manner that I hope will also be insightful, objective, and well written.
In regards to the point you made to RobbyJ about Muckler consulting Murray about choosing Chara over Redden, you mentioned that this is a decision that is not taken likely, and that Muckler consults with all faculties of the organization in order to be 'choose' between players. I agree with this assesment, however, I don't believe the decision rested as much with Murray as you may think. As you say, an NHL franchise is a quarter billion dollar industry, thus making money is a crucial aspect to being successful, and winning can be considered secondary. I believe
the decision to retain Redden's services as opposed to Chara's were based on Redden being the more marketable player in the Ottawa community. He had been here since he was drafted (drafted by the isles, traded the next year to us) and has since been an invaluable part of the community. When the decision was made, he had not yet regressed to his current atrocious style of play. Both players were considered good enough to be a number 1 on any team, thus skill wise was not a leading factor in the decision. Ottawa was a young franchise, and Redden had
been a part of it for nearly a decade. We had a young fanbase, loyal, and Redden not only as a staple of the community, an Assistant Captain on the team, had his own fanbase. I do believe there would have been public outcry had they chosen to keep Chara instead. But for the record, I had wanted them to keep Chara.
In another post, Dave you mention that Bryan Murray does not have the 'agility' to be a GM in the new NHL because he hasn't "adjusted and continued to adjust to
address the challenges and realities of the hockey business." Then you site GM's like Chiarelli, Shero, Tallon as GM's who do have this ability. Again, obviously, I would have to respectfully disagree with you. I agree about the point about the coaches, in that regard, he has not chosen wisely. However, looking at these other GMs, it is easy to say that they turned these teams around, as their teams became
competitive shortly after the GMs arrivals. But I do not believe that is the case. Shero was hired in 2006, in time to draft the 2nd overall player in Jordan Staal. Prior to that year, his team had drafted the phenom Sidney Crosby 1st overall. The year before that, his team drafted arguably the best Russian in hockey, 2nd overall in Evgeni Malkin. The year before that, the Penguins had yet another first
overall pick, and drafted their franchise goalie Marc Andre Fleury. In four years, they had two 1st overall picks and two 2nd overall picks... Picks that have ended up being these generational players. It seems to me as though Shero inherited this incredible team. THe moves he made, such as the Hossa deal, you can argue were solid, but they didn't lead to winning the stanley cup, but had managed to trade away many of their young prospects.
Dale Tallon is a different situation, however, as he was involved in the drafting of all their young stars. But to say he is agile, or moves quickly, is simply untrue. He has been GM since the first year after the lockout, and has only made the
post-season for the first time this year. He signed Khabibulin, which for the greater part of the contract, proved to be a horrendous mistake. To say it was a good signing is extremely difficult thing to do, has he has only proven to be successful this year, the final in his contract, another injury plagued season. This is another team that is where they are today because of the palyers they have drafted, Patrick
Kane, Toews, Barker, Seabrook, Keith, Byfuglien, and Bolland to name a few. He has made a couple of good acquisitions, most notably Patrick Sharp, however, that too took a couple years before paying off.
I'm not saying that they aren't good GM's, I'm trying to make the point that this idea of a quick turnaround due to the hiring of a GM is a myth. Bryan Murray is changing this team in order to make it his own. He is retooling the prospects and has made significant improvements. He re-signed two top forwards in this league. A two time 50 goal scorer, and a young dynamic playmaking centre. Both have had atrocious years, maybe even two atrocious years. But every player had struggled under the previous two coaches that were hired.
This is one aspect I agree with you (Dave) though, the Sens will need to make a couple more changes in order to be successful a Cup threat. But I am under the
impression that those changes could be filled through drafts, and will take time, through the maturing of prospects. To praise Tallon, Shero, Holmgren as superstar GMs and Murray as a goat is unfair. They all inherited different teams in different situations. But one thing the three of them had that Murray didn't, was a core of players made up of prospects: Shero with Fleury, Malkin, Crosby, Letang, and Staal; Tallon with Toews, Kane, Seabrook, Barker, and Keith; and to a lesser extent
Chiarelli with Lucic, Kessel, Krejci, and Bergeron.
Well my rant wasn't as concise, or well written/formulated as yours, but personally, I feel there are valid points in them . Look forward to hearing what you think.
Home
Publications
