The Leafs Management vs NHL

[Kin]

A Lou Lamoriello whose track record as GM has, for some years now, been suspect at best, I might add.

Though, to be fair, that same Lou was severely hampered by a lack of financial strength, and running a team that played in front of a fairly empty arena. How much influence those factors had is debatable, sure, but they're not factors in Toronto.

Yeah, although they haven't been in the news as often as the Thrashers or Coyotes, the Devils as a franchise were probably just as much of a mess over the last ten years as either of them.

 

[Tigger]

I still think bringing him in didn't make a lick of sense.

The Leafs were shy on experience at the management level, I think, if Lou helps transition that group some I think it'll pay off. It sure seems like he was brought in to groom Dubas in particular, which is a bit different from not subordinating oneself.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Yeah, although they haven't been in the news as often as the Thrashers or Coyotes, the Devils as a franchise were probably just as much of a mess over the last ten years as either of them.

He also lost 2 elite level forwards through no fault of his own basically. Kovalchuk bolted to Russia, there was nothing he could do there. And while some NJ fans think Lou could have locked up Parise to a long-term deal before he became an UFA, I think it's pretty clear that he wanted to play in his home state. And those two were basically irreplaceable. There's definitely some question marks surrounding the last few years of Lou's tenure but if even just one of those guys decided to stay in New Jersey Lou would probably still be there too.

 

[Kin]

Yeah, although they haven't been in the news as often as the Thrashers or Coyotes, the Devils as a franchise were probably just as much of a mess over the last ten years as either of them.

He also lost 2 elite level forwards through no fault of his own basically. Kovalchuk bolted to Russia, there was nothing he could do there. And while some NJ fans think Lou could have locked up Parise to a long-term deal before he became an UFA, I think it's pretty clear that he wanted to play in his home state. And those two were basically irreplaceable. There's definitely some question marks surrounding the last few years of Lou's tenure but if even just one of those guys decided to stay in New Jersey Lou would probably still be there too.

I think a pretty fair reading of his last 5 or so years in New Jersey would be to say there's nothing egregiously bad but there's also nothing particularly good either.

 

[herman]

Lou hasn't been a detriment to the management team (yet?). If anything, he helps Dubas and Hunter slot into appropriate positions on the org chart for their level of NHL experience and their individual strengths, and keep Shanahan out of transactional discussions (see Kessel trade, Dave Bolland pursuit).

I do see him as a seat warmer, who brought to the group instant cachet and decades of networking with the old boys club that most of NHL GMing has become.

Is he slightly out of touch with how a salary cap era team should operate? Maybe. But Dubas and Hunter are not, and Pridham definitely is not. Lou has shown a lot of willingness to listen to those voices Shanahan has gathered together. As long as he doesn't seek to mortgage the future for the present over the next three years, this is pretty hard to screw up in my opinion.

 

[Britishbulldog]

A Lou Lamoriello whose track record as GM has, for some years now, been suspect at best, I might add.

Though, to be fair, that same Lou was severely hampered by a lack of financial strength, and running a team that played in front of a fairly empty arena. How much influence those factors had is debatable, sure, but they're not factors in Toronto.

Yeah, although they haven't been in the news as often as the Thrashers or Coyotes, the Devils as a franchise were probably just as much of a mess over the last ten years as either of them.

Yup.  When NJ was in the 2012 Finals, they not only lost to LA Kings but they almost went bankrupt the following week.  It would have been really odd if they had won the Stanley Cup days before going bankrupt.

 

[Britishbulldog]

We've already walked this ground, but this was exactly why I said at the get-go that bringing in LouLam was a problem.  I don't care what the length of his contract is, he's not going to subordinate himself to Dubas/Hunter.  His personality, for one reason, as well as his overall track record as a veteran GM widely considered to be among the best (although, as I've said, his recent work is suspect).

I still think bringing him in didn't make a lick of sense.

The benefit of bringing in Lou Lam is no one else on the management team has the experience with the other NHL GMs like he does.  He knows the other GMs quirks, etc.  That's what I like about him overseeing Dubas and Hunter.

 

[Kin]

Lou hasn't been a detriment to the management team (yet?). If anything, he helps Dubas and Hunter slot into appropriate positions on the org chart for their level of NHL experience and their individual strengths, and keep Shanahan out of transactional discussions (see Kessel trade, Dave Bolland pursuit).

So the argument is essentially that they needed Lou Lamoriello because it wouldn't be "appropriate" for Dubas or Hunter to be running the team because of their complete lack of NHL front office experience, therefore it was prudent to bring in someone who managed to win multiple Stanley Cups and became one of the most successful NHL GMs of all time...after being hired to run the Devils despite his complete lack of NHL front office experience.

 

[Kin]

And, just to push all of my chips to the center of the table, I don't know how legit "We needed to get Shanahan out of contract discussions as evidenced by the offer they made Dave Bolland so it's best they put it in the hands of the guy who signed Ryan Clowe for essentially the same money" is.

 

[jdh1]

And, just to push all of my chips to the center of the table, I don't know how legit "We needed to get Shanahan out of contract discussions as evidenced by the offer they made Dave Bolland so it's best they put it in the hands of the guy who signed Ryan Clowe for essentially the same money" is.

Your funny.

 

[rdowdall]

And, just to push all of my chips to the center of the table, I don't know how legit "We needed to get Shanahan out of contract discussions as evidenced by the offer they made Dave Bolland so it's best they put it in the hands of the guy who signed Ryan Clowe for essentially the same money" is.

Well to be fair, it's been a couple of months and nothing astronomically bad has happened.

 

[herman]

Lou hasn't been a detriment to the management team (yet?). If anything, he helps Dubas and Hunter slot into appropriate positions on the org chart for their level of NHL experience and their individual strengths, and keep Shanahan out of transactional discussions (see Kessel trade, Dave Bolland pursuit).

So the argument is essentially that they needed Lou Lamoriello because it wouldn't be "appropriate" for Dubas or Hunter to be running the team because of their complete lack of NHL front office experience, therefore it was prudent to bring in someone who managed to win multiple Stanley Cups and became one of the most successful NHL GMs of all time...after being hired to run the Devils despite his complete lack of NHL front office experience.

And, just to push all of my chips to the center of the table, I don't know how legit "We needed to get Shanahan out of contract discussions as evidenced by the offer they made Dave Bolland so it's best they put it in the hands of the guy who signed Ryan Clowe for essentially the same money" is.

Don't get me wrong, I'd have loved it if it was just Dubas/Hunter/Pridham from here on out. Since Dubas came on board, we've had no ugly signings (dodging Bolland and Jorges), and we've publicly embraced data-driven decision making. Hunter's results remain to be seen but they're already very promising.

I don't see the sky falling just because Lou Lamoriello is part of the team though.

Who better to help Dubas and Hunter catalyze their development as NHL GMs than "someone who managed to win multiple Stanley Cups and became one of the most successful NHL GMs of all time [...] despite his complete lack of NHL front office experience"? If there is an opportunity to walk that road, I'd rather have a guide who has done it before showing me what he did and does.

Dubas and Hunter are the Nylander and Marner of the management team: sky-high potential, massive achievements outside the NHL. I'm okay with them erring on the side of letting them excel in 'lesser' roles for now, and I don't doubt that their voices will be taken well into account during those big decisions to come.

 

[Kin]

I don't see the sky falling just because Lou Lamoriello is part of the team though.

Woah. That certainly establishes you as being a very reasonable counterpoint to everyone who's saying that Lamoriello is going to doom the team to failure. Good job keeping everyone's wild nonsense in check.

People are allowed to raise concerns about the current structure. We don't need to pretend that everything this group does is divinely spun perfection in order to still have a generally positive outlook for the future.

Who better to help Dubas and Hunter catalyze their development as NHL GMs than "someone who managed to win multiple Stanley Cups and became one of the most successful NHL GMs of all time [...] despite his complete lack of NHL front office experience"? If there is an opportunity to walk that road, I'd rather have a guide who has done it before showing me what he did and does.

Except that's entirely ignoring the point I just made. Doesn't Lamoriello's success prove that "catalyzing" their development isn't necessary? By "easing" them into the GM's role, you're not helping them walk the same road, you're ensuring they take an entirely different and more conventional road.

And you're still avoiding the central issue. Nobody is objecting to the idea of Dubas/Hunter not being made the GM regardless of any other consideration, it's that the guy who was made the GM is someone who hasn't done a particularly good job of running the team's he's been running over the last five or ten years. The sort of "guiding" you're advocating could easily be done as a consultant, similar to what the team wanted to do with Scotty Bowman.

If what encourages you so much about the Dubas era is no ugly signings(and Robidas doesn't look like much of a signing right now) and a data driven approach then, again, Lamoriello's record in that regard is a legitimate concern, between things like Ryan Clowe and apparently thinking a player's appearance matters.

 

[Frank E]

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that managing an NHL team in 2015 is substantially more complicated affair than it was 30 years ago.

 

[Kin]

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that managing an NHL team in 2015 is substantially more complicated affair than it was 30 years ago.

Really? Because I'd guess the opposite.

 

[Redleaf]

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that managing an NHL team in 2015 is substantially more complicated affair than it was 30 years ago.

Really? Because I'd guess the opposite.

Im going to regret this, but do you care to elaborate?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Im going to regret this, but do you care to elaborate?

I think that a lot of the technological advancements that have been made in the last 30 years likely make things a lot easier for management/scouts. Think about all the information and resources that are available with just a few clicks that weren't back then. I mean sure the CBA is a complicated beast, but that's why you have lawyers and capologists on your staff.

 

[bustaheims]

I think that a lot of the technological advancements that have been made in the last 30 years likely make things a lot easier for management/scouts. Think about all the information and resources that are available with just a few clicks that weren't back then. I mean sure the CBA is a complicated beast, but that's why you have lawyers and capologists on your staff.

But, at the same time, teams these days consider a lot more information than they did 30 years ago. It's great that it's easier to access, but that doesn't really cut down the time in terms of processing, comparing, analyzing, etc., compared to the little info they went on in the mid 80s. There's more complications when it comes to dealing with the health of the players. The influx of European players has added the complexities of negotiating against teams in other leagues. The salary structure of the league has changed dramatically. There's a lot more going on now than there was 30 years ago. I'd say the overall job of running a team is more complicated, but that task is now split between more people, who have access to better resources and technology, which probably evens it out.

 

[Kin]

But, at the same time, teams these days consider a lot more information than they did 30 years ago. It's great that it's easier to access, but that doesn't really cut down the time in terms of processing, comparing, analyzing, etc., compared to the little info they went on in the mid 80s. There's more complications when it comes to dealing with the health of the players. The influx of European players has added the complexities of negotiating against teams in other leagues. The salary structure of the league has changed dramatically. There's a lot more going on now than there was 30 years ago. I'd say the overall job of running a team is more complicated, but that task is now split between more people, who have access to better resources and technology, which probably evens it out.

I would really struggle with the idea that it's more complicated to deal with Europe right now with non-negotiable transfer fees than it was when you had to scout players behind the iron curtain and try to figure out which players were amenable to defection.

Likewise, the salary structure has changed but the salary structure has simplified. There is no haggling over rookie bonuses or signing players to personal service contracts with deferred payment structures. There's a standard player contract and salary arbitration. There aren't wild swings in player values from market to market. There aren't the ridiculous free agency compensation rules. Teams can no longer include cash in trades.

Regardless though, the whole argument is kind of a catch-22. Either things are largely similar now as they were then or the advice of anyone who cut their teeth then would have limited value because things are so different now.

 

[bustaheims]

Regardless though, the whole argument is kind of a catch-22. Either things are largely similar now as they were then or the advice of anyone who cut their teeth then would have limited value because things are so different now.

I think the basic job is still largely the same. It's the details that have really changed. In some ways, things have simplified. In others, they've become more complicated or require more nuance, as some of the ways things have streamlined really just created different complications for management teams rather than eliminating complications entirely. Overall, I'd say the difficulty of doing the job probably hasn't shifted much.