An interesting point raised by some fans is that all NHL draft choices are superstars in junior, so you can’t expect all your prospects to continue on this trajectory and to become All-Stars in the NHL, but there is variability.
Some players are drafted based on their body type, and the hunch that they’ll grow into these big bodies and become effective to great NHL’ers, despite lackluster production in junior. This low production may in fact be caused by a late growth spurt that causes the player to be uncoordinated. This is especially true of the present day, when teams are asked to draft eighteen year olds, they’re still growing kids in most cases.
Now sometimes this approach pans out, as for example in the case of Zdeno Chara and Milan Lucic, who turned out even better than projected, and as we hope it continues to do so in the case of Jared Tinordi. In this case, almost like horse trainers can sometimes determine a foal is a future champion by the sweep of the back or the thickness of the hindquarters, picking a player strictly based on their physical attributes instead of their play works out.
In some other cases though, like with Terry Ryan and Lindsay Vallis and Hugh Jessiman, picking a player based on his body type fails the team miserably.
On the other hand, good players who kill it in junior but have a limited stature, guys like Theo Fleury or Jean-François Sauvé or David Desharnais are overlooked and displaced by their bigger colleagues, and have extra hurdles to overcome to make it in the bigs.
So there is an exception to the rule, big bodies that make scouts drool will be picked by scouts despite the fact that they’re not stars, in the hope that they’ll fulfill their physical promise.
Friday, 6 April 2012
Thursday, 5 April 2012
Is Seattle really hungry for hockey?
I have a Seattle newscast playing in the background right now, and they have a segment with the proponent trying to build a new arena in Seattle. It has focused exclusively on bringing back the Sonics. They showed clips of the Sonics, interviewed fans with Sonics gear on saying how much they want their team back… The issue being discussed was potential vehicular traffic concerns if the new arena is built, and how it might interfere with the other sports stadiums in the area, especially the Mariners’. The proponent was at a podium for a press conference on site, and actually said: “I’m a fan of the Sonics, the Seahawks, the Mariners, the Sounders….” No mention was made of hockey, until the very end of the piece, where the anchor encouraged viewers to follow any developments on their website, with a screenshot of their web address and a Sonics and NHL logo. At least the logos were of equal size, although the Sonics was in the prominent left hand position.
Game 81: Montréal 1, Carolina 2 (SO)
Be honest now. Did you find yourself hoping that the Hurricanes' powerplay unit would finally click on their many opportunities in the third period? Did you yell at the ref for not awarding a penalty shot to Eric Staal on his breakaway? How about the chance Chad Larose had with about five seconds left, did you wince when he booted it? Well, despite being a lifelong fan, and despite cheering every nice play (all two of them) les Glorieux made, I was guilty of all the aforementioned infractions. My biggest fear is having the Maple Leafs swiping our draft pick, not another loss at this point of the season.
If as fans we kinda sorta hope the Canadiens kinda sorta don't win, we can't fault the Canadiens to kinda sorta play with almost full effort. Guy Carbonneau had a knowing smile on as he explained before the game that for the last two games we could expect our boys to play with the tip of their stick ("du bout du bâton"), without total commitment and less inclination for sacrifice, so as to finish the season healthy and without injuries.
Different kind of Antichambre tonight, with Gino Odjick as a guest. He spoke of the need for the next management team to come from Québec and, interestingly, to be francophone, so that the team would have leadership with a deep love and passion for the CH, something which was in question with our last GM. He spoke of how the team needed to be a family again, one for all and all for one, and how 'in the old days', issues such as the Mike Cammalleri case and the Scott Gomez situation would have been taken care of in house, by the players. He also stated that the arguments between coaches and players on the bench during games would never have happened, that this would have been taken care of in the dressing room between periods. Mario Tremblay chimed in that players can feel when they are not loved by their coach and GM, that it kills their morale, and I guess he spoke from personal knowledge with his background and relationship with Scotty Bowman.
So a lot to chew on, although you have to take everything Mr. Odjick says with a grain of salt. He didn't quite come out and say it, but he broadly explained that Mr. Gomez "would have been taken care of" during a practice. Someone please alert Commissioner Goodell.
His choice for GM is Julien BriseBois, who he knows personally and professionally and holds in high esteem. He spoke of his drive to improve and get better, of his strength of character and leadership, and his presence and bearing which commands respect. He later explained how the Canadiens used to have an advantage in Serge Savard as their GM, how they used to roll into opposition towns and rinks and feel somewhat superior or invincible with him at the helm of the ship. He stated again that the Canadiens needed that kind of leadership, and that Mr. BriseBois was the man to fill that role.
For coach, he was strongly in favour of Michel Thérrien returning to coach the team, stating that he had the hunger and the passion, that he had unfinished business and a Stanley Cup inside him. He refused to even consider any other candidates, Mr. Thérrien is his man.
In any case, no damage was done by the loser point, since the Leafs and the Wild won and the Oilers also got a a regulation tie point. Not much to say about the game itself, except that it was nice for Blake Geoffrion to score a goal. The kid has talent, he won the Hobey Baker award as the best collegiate player in the U.S., so there's something to work with there. Our boy just needs to set up shop in Brossard this summer and do oodles of training to increase his leg strength and explosiveness. All summer long. No golf, no partying in Nashville. His career will be defined by the efforts he makes this summer.
If as fans we kinda sorta hope the Canadiens kinda sorta don't win, we can't fault the Canadiens to kinda sorta play with almost full effort. Guy Carbonneau had a knowing smile on as he explained before the game that for the last two games we could expect our boys to play with the tip of their stick ("du bout du bâton"), without total commitment and less inclination for sacrifice, so as to finish the season healthy and without injuries.
Different kind of Antichambre tonight, with Gino Odjick as a guest. He spoke of the need for the next management team to come from Québec and, interestingly, to be francophone, so that the team would have leadership with a deep love and passion for the CH, something which was in question with our last GM. He spoke of how the team needed to be a family again, one for all and all for one, and how 'in the old days', issues such as the Mike Cammalleri case and the Scott Gomez situation would have been taken care of in house, by the players. He also stated that the arguments between coaches and players on the bench during games would never have happened, that this would have been taken care of in the dressing room between periods. Mario Tremblay chimed in that players can feel when they are not loved by their coach and GM, that it kills their morale, and I guess he spoke from personal knowledge with his background and relationship with Scotty Bowman.
So a lot to chew on, although you have to take everything Mr. Odjick says with a grain of salt. He didn't quite come out and say it, but he broadly explained that Mr. Gomez "would have been taken care of" during a practice. Someone please alert Commissioner Goodell.
His choice for GM is Julien BriseBois, who he knows personally and professionally and holds in high esteem. He spoke of his drive to improve and get better, of his strength of character and leadership, and his presence and bearing which commands respect. He later explained how the Canadiens used to have an advantage in Serge Savard as their GM, how they used to roll into opposition towns and rinks and feel somewhat superior or invincible with him at the helm of the ship. He stated again that the Canadiens needed that kind of leadership, and that Mr. BriseBois was the man to fill that role.
For coach, he was strongly in favour of Michel Thérrien returning to coach the team, stating that he had the hunger and the passion, that he had unfinished business and a Stanley Cup inside him. He refused to even consider any other candidates, Mr. Thérrien is his man.
In any case, no damage was done by the loser point, since the Leafs and the Wild won and the Oilers also got a a regulation tie point. Not much to say about the game itself, except that it was nice for Blake Geoffrion to score a goal. The kid has talent, he won the Hobey Baker award as the best collegiate player in the U.S., so there's something to work with there. Our boy just needs to set up shop in Brossard this summer and do oodles of training to increase his leg strength and explosiveness. All summer long. No golf, no partying in Nashville. His career will be defined by the efforts he makes this summer.
Mike Milbury should be relieved of his duties on HNIC
Excellent article by Stu Hackel on the idiocy of Mike Milbury.
Some of us can’t stand him for his pro-Bruins, anti-everyone else bias, and his special contempt for the Canadiens and Canucks, but the bigger issue is his retrograde, incendiary views.
A lot of people will state that his ‘free speech’ should be respected, but the classic retort to this is that free speech doesn’t allow someone to falsely yell “Fire!” in a theatre and cause a stampede. In this particular case, Mr. Milbury’s position as a commentor doesn’t permit him to ridicule people by snide references to their putative gender or sexual orientation, and to make light of someone’s inability to play due to brain injuries. At least, he should be shunned by the league and have to resort to airing his views on an obscure blog, instead of being given a national broadcast platform to sputter his inanities.
I enjoin the CBC again to rid itself of this negative force on their telecasts and replace him with a thoughtful, accomplished former player who can provide enlightenment instead of bleating along with P.J. Stock and Don Cherry that hockey games are won by crosschecking your opponents into submission.
Some of us can’t stand him for his pro-Bruins, anti-everyone else bias, and his special contempt for the Canadiens and Canucks, but the bigger issue is his retrograde, incendiary views.
A lot of people will state that his ‘free speech’ should be respected, but the classic retort to this is that free speech doesn’t allow someone to falsely yell “Fire!” in a theatre and cause a stampede. In this particular case, Mr. Milbury’s position as a commentor doesn’t permit him to ridicule people by snide references to their putative gender or sexual orientation, and to make light of someone’s inability to play due to brain injuries. At least, he should be shunned by the league and have to resort to airing his views on an obscure blog, instead of being given a national broadcast platform to sputter his inanities.
I enjoin the CBC again to rid itself of this negative force on their telecasts and replace him with a thoughtful, accomplished former player who can provide enlightenment instead of bleating along with P.J. Stock and Don Cherry that hockey games are won by crosschecking your opponents into submission.
Jeffrey Loria and Muhammad Ali don't belong in the same sentence
Where’s do you draw the line between celebrating Muhammad Ali and exploiting him?
I’m not sure where the boundary exists exactly, but am certain that Jeffrey Loria riding in a golf cart with him and having his arm paternally around his shoulders is way, way beyond it.
I’m not sure where the boundary exists exactly, but am certain that Jeffrey Loria riding in a golf cart with him and having his arm paternally around his shoulders is way, way beyond it.
Wednesday, 4 April 2012
Game 80: Montréal 5, Tampa Bay 2
The Canadiens' first line had cooled off somewhat in the last few games, with their production dampened if not their effort and their enthusiasm, but exploded back into form with an eight point night, keying the win against an admittedly defensively-poor Lightning lineup.
The Canadiens knew they couldn't rely on Carey Price and probably thought they needed to create chances and score more than a couple to have a chance to win. And this was before the trusty backup Peter Budaj gift-wrapped a goal for Vincent Lecavalier. As usual though, the only dangerous combo was the Desharnais line, with some flashes from Tomas Plekanec and Louis Leblanc.
Alexei Emelin scored a nice goal on a sneak in from the blueline, and on a nice feed from David Desharnais. It was nice to see him celebrate with his teammates and give props to David. He is not as spectacular with his open-ice hits as he was in the middle of the season, some speculate that he may be tired in his first 80 game season, but this goal and his overall performance augur well for next season. His increased familiarity with the league and his new city and teammates should lead to an improvement in play, especially if he is paired with a healthy Andrei Markov. We can count on Alexei as a solution to one of the Canadiens problems next season, as opposed to being a question mark.
We saw less of Ryan Malone in the game than we have this season, and it could be happenstance, but some will nod sagely that it is the result of the Brad Staubitz effect, which incited Mr. Malone to take a moment or two of sober reflection before trying to decapitate another Canadien. It's detrimental to the NHL that it allows itself to be steered in that direction by the Brian Burkes of the world and the Boston Bruins, resulting in a situation where the worst player on the Canadiens becomes one of its more valuable members.
I noticed after Max Pacioretty's second goal, on the subsequent shift, that both Tomas Plekanec and René Bourque had an opportunity to go after a loose puck to create at least an odd-man rush if not a breakaway, but they both kind of looked at each other and hesitated as to who would go for the puck along the boards and who would streak to the net, in a situation reminiscent of a second baseman and a first baseman on the diamond waiting for a pop fly to come down and each deferring to each other, only to see it drop to the turf between them. The result of our play is that both veered toward the puck, then away from the puck, in unison, before Tomas went for it and René headed for the net, for what ultimately turned into a broken play. So not too much to make of this, except for the obvious observation that these two players may have a future together, but as of now have very little chemistry and on-ice communication. Again, I hope that over the summer René gets more settled in Montréal, as well as with his teammates, and that on top of all the training he'll do, he'll have time to get his head on straight and get over the trade and the suspension and rebound next season. We need him to be the big tough winger who pots goals and dishes out hits and who is hard to play against, as Mario Tremblay remembers him from the days when he coached at Minnesota and Mr. Bourque played in Chicago.
The Canadiens knew they couldn't rely on Carey Price and probably thought they needed to create chances and score more than a couple to have a chance to win. And this was before the trusty backup Peter Budaj gift-wrapped a goal for Vincent Lecavalier. As usual though, the only dangerous combo was the Desharnais line, with some flashes from Tomas Plekanec and Louis Leblanc.
Alexei Emelin scored a nice goal on a sneak in from the blueline, and on a nice feed from David Desharnais. It was nice to see him celebrate with his teammates and give props to David. He is not as spectacular with his open-ice hits as he was in the middle of the season, some speculate that he may be tired in his first 80 game season, but this goal and his overall performance augur well for next season. His increased familiarity with the league and his new city and teammates should lead to an improvement in play, especially if he is paired with a healthy Andrei Markov. We can count on Alexei as a solution to one of the Canadiens problems next season, as opposed to being a question mark.
We saw less of Ryan Malone in the game than we have this season, and it could be happenstance, but some will nod sagely that it is the result of the Brad Staubitz effect, which incited Mr. Malone to take a moment or two of sober reflection before trying to decapitate another Canadien. It's detrimental to the NHL that it allows itself to be steered in that direction by the Brian Burkes of the world and the Boston Bruins, resulting in a situation where the worst player on the Canadiens becomes one of its more valuable members.
I noticed after Max Pacioretty's second goal, on the subsequent shift, that both Tomas Plekanec and René Bourque had an opportunity to go after a loose puck to create at least an odd-man rush if not a breakaway, but they both kind of looked at each other and hesitated as to who would go for the puck along the boards and who would streak to the net, in a situation reminiscent of a second baseman and a first baseman on the diamond waiting for a pop fly to come down and each deferring to each other, only to see it drop to the turf between them. The result of our play is that both veered toward the puck, then away from the puck, in unison, before Tomas went for it and René headed for the net, for what ultimately turned into a broken play. So not too much to make of this, except for the obvious observation that these two players may have a future together, but as of now have very little chemistry and on-ice communication. Again, I hope that over the summer René gets more settled in Montréal, as well as with his teammates, and that on top of all the training he'll do, he'll have time to get his head on straight and get over the trade and the suspension and rebound next season. We need him to be the big tough winger who pots goals and dishes out hits and who is hard to play against, as Mario Tremblay remembers him from the days when he coached at Minnesota and Mr. Bourque played in Chicago.
Tuesday, 3 April 2012
Reporters fumbled the 'Gauthier' story from the start
I want to rail against the paucity of information we receive from our sports ‘reporters’. Not that this is restricted to hockey or these fine folks who cover the Canadiens, but we were once again failed by them. We who are great consumers of the game and any information on our team, we were not told what was what. Once again, as soon as an incumbent was let go, much like in the Mike Cammalleri situation and countless others before, the dirty laundry was aired out for all to see, but too late for anyone to have benefited from it.
Over the last two years, Pierre Gauthier’s track record was discussed on multiple platforms by many analysts, some of who decried it while others gave grudging approval. He was accused of shadowy transgressions and lack of availability for the media, but that’s as far as it went.
Now that he’s gone, we get the now infamous ‘cookie rationing’ story out of Ottawa. François Gagnon revealed that all the Canadiens players operated in fear and wouldn’t talk to journalists informally or in anything other than platitudes because they didn’t want to run afoul of Mr. Gauthier. He told an anecdote of two players he was chatting with when all of a sudden one shut up and walked away when he saw that Mr. Gauthier was approaching. Also, Mario Tremblay and Benoit Brunet now pipe up and state that the Canadiens dressing room will have a much lighter tone since most of the team couldn’t stand or hated Mr. Gauthier.
Isn’t this information something that should have been shared much earlier with the public?
Of course, some will jump in and state that if any reporters ‘broke’ this news in such specific, pointed terms, they would lose their access to the team and wouldn’t be trusted with any more info in the future. Which is exactly the issue: what is the point of the access if the information isn’t shared with us? What good does it do us? Why should I buy the Globe and Mail if I’m not being told the truth? Are the journalists in the press box for kicks, to partake in the spread? What is the point of sticking a microphone in a player’s face if the unspoken agreement is that they’ll be asked softball questions and respond with platitudes?
The best part of team sports was always the camaraderie, the way we shot the breeze before and after games and practices and road trips. I’ve often thought that this atmosphere would be severely hampered if there were a bunch of strangers walking around broadcasting what we said about the opponents or the girl in the yellow tank top in the stands, how that would be a big crimp in being a professional athlete. If it was up to me, and I was the NHL commissioner, I’d immediately make the dressing room off-limits to reporters, I’d give the boys a break and some privacy when they’re headed for the showers. Nothing is being gained by anyone from this post-game kabuki, let’s do away with it.
Over the last two years, Pierre Gauthier’s track record was discussed on multiple platforms by many analysts, some of who decried it while others gave grudging approval. He was accused of shadowy transgressions and lack of availability for the media, but that’s as far as it went.
Now that he’s gone, we get the now infamous ‘cookie rationing’ story out of Ottawa. François Gagnon revealed that all the Canadiens players operated in fear and wouldn’t talk to journalists informally or in anything other than platitudes because they didn’t want to run afoul of Mr. Gauthier. He told an anecdote of two players he was chatting with when all of a sudden one shut up and walked away when he saw that Mr. Gauthier was approaching. Also, Mario Tremblay and Benoit Brunet now pipe up and state that the Canadiens dressing room will have a much lighter tone since most of the team couldn’t stand or hated Mr. Gauthier.
Isn’t this information something that should have been shared much earlier with the public?
Of course, some will jump in and state that if any reporters ‘broke’ this news in such specific, pointed terms, they would lose their access to the team and wouldn’t be trusted with any more info in the future. Which is exactly the issue: what is the point of the access if the information isn’t shared with us? What good does it do us? Why should I buy the Globe and Mail if I’m not being told the truth? Are the journalists in the press box for kicks, to partake in the spread? What is the point of sticking a microphone in a player’s face if the unspoken agreement is that they’ll be asked softball questions and respond with platitudes?
The best part of team sports was always the camaraderie, the way we shot the breeze before and after games and practices and road trips. I’ve often thought that this atmosphere would be severely hampered if there were a bunch of strangers walking around broadcasting what we said about the opponents or the girl in the yellow tank top in the stands, how that would be a big crimp in being a professional athlete. If it was up to me, and I was the NHL commissioner, I’d immediately make the dressing room off-limits to reporters, I’d give the boys a break and some privacy when they’re headed for the showers. Nothing is being gained by anyone from this post-game kabuki, let’s do away with it.
The choice of the Canadiens' next General Manager (2)
I wrote in January I think that I wanted Julien BriseBois as the next GM of the Canadiens. I thought we should hire a bright whiz-kid instead of a recycled GM from another organization. His résumé was enough to convince me on the first read.
Having said that, I haven’t met any of these candidates. Many are quite impressive in their background and accomplishments so far. I would be comfortable with Marc Bergevin, Claude Loiselle, Vincent Damphousse, a couple others as well. I have to trust that the hiring committee will make the right decision. With all the crap we’re only hearing now about Mr. Gauthier, the situation at the New Forum can only improve. Right?
The only candidate I’m dead set against is Pierre McGuire. I don’t understand who would consider him a serious candidate when compared to the others, his résumé is very weak. It’s like when you’re choosing a Chef, you will interview Chefs or Sous-Chefs from other locations or your own Sous-Chefs. You’re not going to hire the guy who turned out to be a mediocre chef 15 years ago and who went on to be a sommelier. Nothing wrong with being a sommelier, it’s an important part of the whole dining experience, but once you’ve gone down that career path it’s hard to jump from there and land at the top of the profession of another career path. You kind of have to backtrack and pay your dues as a Chef de partie somewhere and work your way up again. Along the lines of that analogy, I understand that Mr. McGuire doesn’t want to go back to being a drone in a front office, that he wants to get the top job, since he’s doing well where he’s at now, but that’s the decision he has to make. If he’s trapped by his current salary, well that’s the bed he’s made. We all make decisions in life. If he doesn’t want to prove himself in a junior role, I don’t understand why it would be incumbent upon us to take a leap of faith and trust him with the keys to our franchise. There are other more qualified pilots with more certification, who haven’t been passed over for similar posts repeatedly.
Having said that, I haven’t met any of these candidates. Many are quite impressive in their background and accomplishments so far. I would be comfortable with Marc Bergevin, Claude Loiselle, Vincent Damphousse, a couple others as well. I have to trust that the hiring committee will make the right decision. With all the crap we’re only hearing now about Mr. Gauthier, the situation at the New Forum can only improve. Right?
The only candidate I’m dead set against is Pierre McGuire. I don’t understand who would consider him a serious candidate when compared to the others, his résumé is very weak. It’s like when you’re choosing a Chef, you will interview Chefs or Sous-Chefs from other locations or your own Sous-Chefs. You’re not going to hire the guy who turned out to be a mediocre chef 15 years ago and who went on to be a sommelier. Nothing wrong with being a sommelier, it’s an important part of the whole dining experience, but once you’ve gone down that career path it’s hard to jump from there and land at the top of the profession of another career path. You kind of have to backtrack and pay your dues as a Chef de partie somewhere and work your way up again. Along the lines of that analogy, I understand that Mr. McGuire doesn’t want to go back to being a drone in a front office, that he wants to get the top job, since he’s doing well where he’s at now, but that’s the decision he has to make. If he’s trapped by his current salary, well that’s the bed he’s made. We all make decisions in life. If he doesn’t want to prove himself in a junior role, I don’t understand why it would be incumbent upon us to take a leap of faith and trust him with the keys to our franchise. There are other more qualified pilots with more certification, who haven’t been passed over for similar posts repeatedly.
Saturday, 31 March 2012
Game 79: Montréal 2, Washington 3 (SO)
Tonight's game told us more about the Washington Capitals than the Montréal Canadiens. They were playing a tired team, that had played the previous night on the road and then traveled to D.C., and jumped to a 2-0 lead, but then couldn't put them away. They were facing the journeyman goaltender Peter Budaj, and should have stepped on the Canadiens neck, but couldn't close the deal in regulation. There's no harm done to their playoff chances, but it says a lot about their motivation and desire and mindset and playoff readiness.
The DD line has cooled off somewhat in recent games, and the centreman had a poor game compared to his usual standards. Maybe he is getting tired, or the motivation is hard to come by this late in the season, but he was responsible for a few breakdowns and finished his evening -1. On the offensive side, he didn't seem to click, and his hesitation to shoot in favour of passing to his teammates may be a detriment at this point. The opponents may have the book on him now, and cover the passing lanes and dare him to shoot, like they do to Tomas Kaberle. He'll need to work on his shot and one-timers this summer to address this issue.
P.K. Subban is finally listening to me. I've often asked him to stop relying on the big windup slapshot exclusively, and to fake it then deke the shot blocker and go around him for the wrist shot. We saw him use my tactic tonight to great effect if no tangible result. If he continues to do so, he will be more effective, and his slapshot will be more effective as well, if it ever hits the net, since the defenders won't be able to set up for it so easily.
Something had been bugging me about Brad Staubitz, and now I know what it is. He's a dead ringer for this guy .
Good night, we pick up the regulation tie point, but our draft standings competitors Minnesota and Toronto bungled their way to a win, so not too much damage done.
The DD line has cooled off somewhat in recent games, and the centreman had a poor game compared to his usual standards. Maybe he is getting tired, or the motivation is hard to come by this late in the season, but he was responsible for a few breakdowns and finished his evening -1. On the offensive side, he didn't seem to click, and his hesitation to shoot in favour of passing to his teammates may be a detriment at this point. The opponents may have the book on him now, and cover the passing lanes and dare him to shoot, like they do to Tomas Kaberle. He'll need to work on his shot and one-timers this summer to address this issue.
P.K. Subban is finally listening to me. I've often asked him to stop relying on the big windup slapshot exclusively, and to fake it then deke the shot blocker and go around him for the wrist shot. We saw him use my tactic tonight to great effect if no tangible result. If he continues to do so, he will be more effective, and his slapshot will be more effective as well, if it ever hits the net, since the defenders won't be able to set up for it so easily.
Something had been bugging me about Brad Staubitz, and now I know what it is. He's a dead ringer for this guy .
Good night, we pick up the regulation tie point, but our draft standings competitors Minnesota and Toronto bungled their way to a win, so not too much damage done.
The choice of the Canadiens' next General Manager
As the Canadiens sift through a long list of potential candidates for their General Manager vacancy, there are a few trains of thought that can be seen in the fans.
One is the repetitive, reflexive assertion that they should hire 'the best man available regardless of language', in the face of these candidates' remarkable résumés and previous achievements. We find in the most likely candidates that two have shown the intellectual ability to obtain a law degree. A few are currently Assistant General Managers for other teams. A couple have intimate knowledge of the Collective Bargaining Agreement through their roles as NHLPA executives or as a player agent. All of them have shown talent and dedication by ascending the echelons of their profession, and at least some of the required qualifications and traits necessary to succeed as a GM.
Somehow these candidates don't satisfy the absolutists, who still feel that the team is hampering itself with an arbitrary and irrelevant language requirement, and that there are some clearly better candidates out there who will be shut out of the process because they are unilingual. When pressed to produce these budding Sam Pollocks and Bill Torreys lost in the wilderness, a few names are offered, but none that seem clearly more worthy of an interview than any of the names punted about, save for maybe Jim Nill.
Conversely, this faction discounts as meaningless or worthless the candidates' knowledge of the team's history and local market and the ability to communicate with its fans.
Another apparent misunderstanding is how the recruiting process is conducted, either generally or in the hockey world. Usually, a wide net is cast to review as many résumés and evaluate as many candidates as possible. Through various hurdles or benchmarks most are eliminated until a short list is drawn up, and these candidates get interviewed to evaluate their skills, personal abilities and potential fit within the organization. The interviewer or interview panel then may select a candidate, or maybe select a couple of finalists for another round of interviews if they are seen as being 'neck and neck', to allow for another opportunity to differentiate them.
In the end the person that is hired is sometimes clearly the best candidate and best fit, but most often there are a few candidates who would be suitable and the decision is a judgment call. It's not as if one candidate scores an 89 and everyone else is in the 60's and 70's, it's never that objective or clear cut. You end up having one candidate who impresses with her energy and enthusiasm and original ideas, and another who shows great experience and judgment and an impressive track record, and have to choose between the two.
If the choice was so obvious, if interviews were objective and categorical and not open to bias and error, there wouldn't be any dismissals. People would be hired into jobs and perform well in that role until promoted or recruited somewhere else. This is obviously not the case. Candidates are misevaluated or end up underperforming all the time. The best you can do is find a group of candidates who fit the profile and meet all the basic requirements and most of the preferred requirements, and then do your best and hope you come up with the right choice.
One of the more common errors, however, is to not winnow down your list and interview everyone. In these situations you end up with a lot of candidates that blend into a mishmash in the interview panel's mind. Those that were interviewed earlier in the process tend to fade from memory. The very first candidates and the ones who met the panel more recently tend to stand out in the panel's mind, at the expense of worthy but unlucky candidates scheduled in the long boring middle of the pack.
I remember going over candidate selection methods in a university industrial psychology course, and learning that none of them are foolproof. Interestingly, the one which recruiters or executives tend to prize the most, the interview, is one of the least accurate selection methods based on the retention rate of hirees, yet is the one that is most relied on and is the one that executives swear by. Studies demonstrated that a process which relied exclusively on résumé review and background and reference checks was a more effective way to find the right candidate than one which included an interview process. Still, it is almost impossible to convince an employer to hire a candidate without meeting them first in an interview.
Interestingly, the most effective way to select a candidate is the realistic job preview, where a candidate or group of candidates are put in the workplace and perform the duties required of them, or as near as is possible, and are evaluated thus. The realistic job preview consistently proves to be the best selection method, in that the candidate can evaluate whether the job and workplace is the right environment for herself, the potential coworkers can offer feedback to the recruiters, and the recruiters can see how the candidates perform. Practically, this selection method is hard to use in most settings, as there are problems with allowing candidates to do 'real work'. In some fields however, such as policing or the fire service or the military, cadet programs and ride-along programs serve this function and show great results.
In our case, candidates such as Marc Bergevin, Claude Loiselle and Julien Brisebois are already on their realistic job previews, in that they are performing in an Assistant GM role and can be evaluated on how they are performing in as near a position as we can come up with. Francois Giguère actually performed in the GM role and has a track record. All that would remain in their case would be to evaluate their fit within the organization.
Which brings us to another train of thought that is puzzling, which is that somehow Pierre McGuire is one of the candidates who deserves serious consideration for the position. While Mr. McGuire is an energetic broadcaster and a likable individual, he performed very poorly in an Assistant GM position with the Hartford Whalers, and has been out of the management ranks for more than a decade. If his résumé is reviewed against some of the other candidates that are bandied about, his shouldn't even make it on the short list pile.
One is the repetitive, reflexive assertion that they should hire 'the best man available regardless of language', in the face of these candidates' remarkable résumés and previous achievements. We find in the most likely candidates that two have shown the intellectual ability to obtain a law degree. A few are currently Assistant General Managers for other teams. A couple have intimate knowledge of the Collective Bargaining Agreement through their roles as NHLPA executives or as a player agent. All of them have shown talent and dedication by ascending the echelons of their profession, and at least some of the required qualifications and traits necessary to succeed as a GM.
Somehow these candidates don't satisfy the absolutists, who still feel that the team is hampering itself with an arbitrary and irrelevant language requirement, and that there are some clearly better candidates out there who will be shut out of the process because they are unilingual. When pressed to produce these budding Sam Pollocks and Bill Torreys lost in the wilderness, a few names are offered, but none that seem clearly more worthy of an interview than any of the names punted about, save for maybe Jim Nill.
Conversely, this faction discounts as meaningless or worthless the candidates' knowledge of the team's history and local market and the ability to communicate with its fans.
Another apparent misunderstanding is how the recruiting process is conducted, either generally or in the hockey world. Usually, a wide net is cast to review as many résumés and evaluate as many candidates as possible. Through various hurdles or benchmarks most are eliminated until a short list is drawn up, and these candidates get interviewed to evaluate their skills, personal abilities and potential fit within the organization. The interviewer or interview panel then may select a candidate, or maybe select a couple of finalists for another round of interviews if they are seen as being 'neck and neck', to allow for another opportunity to differentiate them.
In the end the person that is hired is sometimes clearly the best candidate and best fit, but most often there are a few candidates who would be suitable and the decision is a judgment call. It's not as if one candidate scores an 89 and everyone else is in the 60's and 70's, it's never that objective or clear cut. You end up having one candidate who impresses with her energy and enthusiasm and original ideas, and another who shows great experience and judgment and an impressive track record, and have to choose between the two.
If the choice was so obvious, if interviews were objective and categorical and not open to bias and error, there wouldn't be any dismissals. People would be hired into jobs and perform well in that role until promoted or recruited somewhere else. This is obviously not the case. Candidates are misevaluated or end up underperforming all the time. The best you can do is find a group of candidates who fit the profile and meet all the basic requirements and most of the preferred requirements, and then do your best and hope you come up with the right choice.
One of the more common errors, however, is to not winnow down your list and interview everyone. In these situations you end up with a lot of candidates that blend into a mishmash in the interview panel's mind. Those that were interviewed earlier in the process tend to fade from memory. The very first candidates and the ones who met the panel more recently tend to stand out in the panel's mind, at the expense of worthy but unlucky candidates scheduled in the long boring middle of the pack.
I remember going over candidate selection methods in a university industrial psychology course, and learning that none of them are foolproof. Interestingly, the one which recruiters or executives tend to prize the most, the interview, is one of the least accurate selection methods based on the retention rate of hirees, yet is the one that is most relied on and is the one that executives swear by. Studies demonstrated that a process which relied exclusively on résumé review and background and reference checks was a more effective way to find the right candidate than one which included an interview process. Still, it is almost impossible to convince an employer to hire a candidate without meeting them first in an interview.
Interestingly, the most effective way to select a candidate is the realistic job preview, where a candidate or group of candidates are put in the workplace and perform the duties required of them, or as near as is possible, and are evaluated thus. The realistic job preview consistently proves to be the best selection method, in that the candidate can evaluate whether the job and workplace is the right environment for herself, the potential coworkers can offer feedback to the recruiters, and the recruiters can see how the candidates perform. Practically, this selection method is hard to use in most settings, as there are problems with allowing candidates to do 'real work'. In some fields however, such as policing or the fire service or the military, cadet programs and ride-along programs serve this function and show great results.
In our case, candidates such as Marc Bergevin, Claude Loiselle and Julien Brisebois are already on their realistic job previews, in that they are performing in an Assistant GM role and can be evaluated on how they are performing in as near a position as we can come up with. Francois Giguère actually performed in the GM role and has a track record. All that would remain in their case would be to evaluate their fit within the organization.
Which brings us to another train of thought that is puzzling, which is that somehow Pierre McGuire is one of the candidates who deserves serious consideration for the position. While Mr. McGuire is an energetic broadcaster and a likable individual, he performed very poorly in an Assistant GM position with the Hartford Whalers, and has been out of the management ranks for more than a decade. If his résumé is reviewed against some of the other candidates that are bandied about, his shouldn't even make it on the short list pile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)