Yzerman steps down as GM

[Motor City Sonics]

NOW ?     What the **** has happened to this organization.   

I am not upset about this, but this timing is just bizarre.    

What a mess.   

This goes back to two years ago when they were on the verge of making the playoffs and Yzerman did NOTHING to help them.   That pissed off the fanbase and it pissed off Larkin and the power play for Larkin just worked.   And I can't blame him.   Sitting on a mountain of draft capital forever means nothing.   

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

he was gm in tampa that built a dynasty.  this is not a "peter principle" situation.  its a man who hasnt adjusted to the new reality situation.

I disagree to the point because Tampa is still going strong - why? Because he left the right people behind there. I would say the evidence argues he built a great staff in Tampa by luck and not by ability, and when he had to do it again in Detroit, he couldn't, because he apparently hadn't really known what he was doing when he did it the first time. He didn't actually have that ability as a reproducible skill.

Not quite the same as Joe Dumars, but similar in that Joe built a great team once based on one trade that worked out really well and he was never able to execute another move that improved the team in the same way. So he also didn't actually have the ability to build a team as a reproducible skill.

Contrast that to Dombrowski, who actually did/can go from place to place and reproduce the same result, or Ron Wolfe, who built NFL winners where ever he went.

But whatever, ice under the bridge at this point.

Edited July 15 by gehringer_2

[slothfacekilla]

Entering my villain era and hoping Draper gets named the next GM just to see the internet explode

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

if he comes back and is seen as the guy who got the most popular red wing ever kicked upstairs, he will be booed mercilessly.

Fans are fickle. All they have to do is win/make the playoffs and the fans will cheer him  like crazy 🤷‍♂️

[buddha]

51 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I disagree to the point because Tampa is still going strong - why? Because he left the right people behind there. I would say the evidence argues he built a great staff in Tampa by luck and not by ability, and when he had to do it again in Detroit, he couldn't, because he apparently hadn't really known what he was doing when he did it the first time. He didn't actually have that ability as a reproducible skill.

Not quite the same as Joe Dumars, but similar in that Joe built a great team once based on one trade that worked out really well and he was never able to execute another move that improved the team in the same way. So he also didn't actually have the ability to build a team as a reproducible skill.

Contrast that to Dombrowski, who actually did/can go from place to place and reproduce the same result, or Ron Wolfe, who built NFL winners where ever he went.

But whatever, ice under the bridge at this point.

but that's not the peter principle.  that would be if he was the number 2 in tampa and was promoted to the #1 here and failed.  it was a lateral move.

i think a lot of this shows that a lot of success in the nhl comes down to luck.

[slothfacekilla]

Something had to happen right? 

Why would they let him run the draft including trading Cossa, make free agency movies including multiple trades, have him face the media where he would get Larkin questions....only to remove him from the job in mid-July?  The timing is so damn random it feels like something new had to happen to be the last straw for either ownership or Yzerman. 

Either way this organization is a mess right now.

[gehringer_2]

11 minutes ago, buddha said:

but that's not the peter principle.  that would be if he was the number 2 in tampa and was promoted to the #1 here and failed.  it was a lateral move.

i think a lot of this shows that a lot of success in the nhl comes down to luck.

OK - I'll grant you that by title. I'm looking at it more from the standpoint that he moved into a more difficult job even if it was the same title.

[gehringer_2]

12 minutes ago, buddha said:

i think a lot of this shows that a lot of success in the nhl comes down to luck.

That's too true everywhere. 

[Jason_R]

27 minutes ago, slothfacekilla said:

Something had to happen right? 

Why would they let him run the draft including trading Cossa, make free agency movies including multiple trades, have him face the media where he would get Larkin questions....only to remove him from the job in mid-July?  The timing is so damn random it feels like something new had to happen to be the last straw for either ownership or Yzerman. 

Either way this organization is a mess right now.

I’ve assumed for a long time that Stevie told Chris it would be an 8-10 year rebuild. Three years of near misses could be ascribed to tough luck, but to lose Larkin like that was a black eye. I’m sure there were multiple conversations back-and-forth about how it came to that and how to bounce back from it but I also assume that Chris saw what the rest of us saw, which was no clear pathway to resolving the impasse. Yes Steve could not get rid of Larkin, Chris had to get rid of Steve.

Anyway, it needed to happen. I’m sure that almost every GM and every perspective GM would love the chance to run an original six franchise, with a dedicated and very wealthy ownership group, and a rabid fan base. They will get someone good and build a model franchise.

[Jason_R]

I don't know who wrote this and I have no thoughts about any of these specific candidates, but yes, I think you make the calls to Nill and Tulsky, and yes, I think you interview people from Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay, and Dallas.  

[gehringer_2]

If we can take Scott Harris as any guide, at least it's not likely to be another NHL 'old boy' retread. (I hope!)

[Mr.TaterSalad]

First and foremost, other than the Red Wings guys like Lidstrom, Horcoff, and Pushor, I know nothing about any of these guys listed. So who am I to pretend I know who the perfect replacement candidate is. I would naturally prefer someone from a successful, winning organization like a Carolina, Florida, or Vegas. But you can still find a winning GM from a less successful organization that one of those teams. What I want to see out of the next GM are the following things . . .

1. This person be given full autonomy to do what they want, when they want. I don't want an owner meddling and vetoing trades or personnel moves. The new GM should be able to make any changes they want to this roster and this front office staff.

2. They must embrace the idea that we need to rebuild this roster, not continue on with the status quo. The status quo hasn't worked and the current iteration of the rebuild has failed. The new GM must come in and make wholesale changes to this roster and work to acquire more top-end offensive talent. That's likely going to require drafting that talent with top 3-5 picks. Thus, the need to tare down the roster, tank, and start a new with high draft capital.

3. Embrace analytics and metrics. One thing some of the more successful teams of late have done, like Carolina, Colorado, Florida, and Vegas, has been their embrace of analytics. Yzerman seemed to shy away from Corsi and some of the newer analytical traits. They need an analytics department with a Director of Analytics helping to guide roster construction. It's a new era and this organization has to adopt to it.

4. Allow young players the opportunity to succeed or to fail. Going back to the Ken Holland days, and continuing on in the Yzerman era, there was at times an unwillingness and a reticence to allowing young players to come up and fail on the job. Every player has their own unique learning curve and develops on a different time table. But you have to allow each player to have an opportunity in the first place. if you keep them overseas, in the AHL, or in the press box, what are they truly learning there? Don't be afraid to call up a kid and watch him make mistakes and fail for a while. That failure will be apart of his learning curve and growth. Those mistakes, if he is a capable, smart, talented, and hardworking player will lead to his growth and production in the end.

5. Stop treating veterans as bars of gold. Yes, there are good veteran players that have made this team (and can make any team) better. DeBrinact, Gibson, Kane, are all clear examples of this. But don't suppress the growth and development of your under 24 years old players just because you want another veteran presence on this roster and you're afraid of them making a mistake. The treatment of veteran players as bars of gold and the unwillingness to allow young players to make mistakes on the job is how you end up with bad contracts and a failed rebuild. Appleton, Chiarot, Compher, Gustafsson, Husso, Perron 2.0, Petry, Talbot, and on are all examples of bad signings that did nothing but take up cap space and hold back young players.

6. Don't be a **** to your own players and recognize that you aren't always right about everything. Accept that some of your own guys will occasionally be critical of a move/s you make. Understand you aren't perfect and be open to constructive criticism and feedback from others in the front office and top guys on your roster. When you're a **** to your own guys, as Yzerman apparently was with Larkin, it makes them not want to stay here and it turns off other players from coming here in free agency or via trade.

7. Don't just hire your friends and family in the front office. Of course any GM in the league is going to bring in guys they are familiar with and trust. That's to be expected. But you also have to be willing to bring in new blood, guys that have modern ideas on how to build a team. Guys that aren't afraid to take chances on drafting and developing different types of players that who are already in your pipeline.

8. Not every forward has to be a two-way, defensively sound forward. It is ok to have guys on your roster who aren't two-way forwards and just offensive-minded players. Having a handful of offense first players, who don't give you a ton of defense is ok. If those guys are tough forecheckers, that's even better. But not every forward has to play defensively sound hockey. You can have guys that make defensive mistakes and cough up the puck occasionally because they are hella aggressive on the offensive end in the zone.

9. Don't be afraid of term length in contracts you give out to free agents or when exploring trades for players you'll have to extend. No one is saying you can't be shrewd and discern which players should and should not get longer terms on their contracts. No one is saying every guy you sign has to be 3-4 years+ on term. But don't be afraid to sign a guy to a big money deal, on a longer term contract.

10. Understand the importance of scoring depth. We are one of the least deep teams in the league when it comes to scoring. We barely roll out two full lines of players who can score above 12-15 goals and 30 points in a season. While you can't have a roster full of 60-70-80-90+ point guys, you do need more 40-45-50-55 points guys in the middle of your roster on the second and third lines. Carolina had 10 guys above 35 points on their roster this year, we had 6. Those four extra guys giving you another 50+ points for your team in goals and assists make a difference. You can't roll out third and fourth lines that contribute as little as ours do. You need more back end production.

11. Understand the importance of forechecking in today's game, especially in the East. We are not only one of the least deep teams in the Eat, we are clearly one of the softest teams. We need to get tougher on the forecheck. But this isn't about going out and bringing in more Darren McCarty's and Tony Twists. You need guys on the forecheck who will beat other teams down, take possession of the puck, and give you 35-40+ points in production. This is something Florida has done so well for the past 4-5 seasons and got them multiple cups. You can't build a roster that continues to be as soft on the forecheck as we have been.

Edited July 15 by Mr.TaterSalad

[Shinzaki]

There was a certain level of weirdness coming out of LCA the past couple of weeks.  SY didn't want to move Larkin for futures because he wanted to stay  playoff competitive....SY signaled that he was concerned at the contracts players were signing.  At the heart of it..it's hard to reconcile those two concepts.  you don't want Stramel, Yurov and picks...ok.  You don't want Robertson because it's gonna cost you 17 or 18 million a year..ok...what exactly are you hoping for here?

[1984Echoes]

31 minutes ago, Shinzaki said:

There was a certain level of weirdness coming out of LCA the past couple of weeks.  SY didn't want to move Larkin for futures because he wanted to stay  playoff competitive....SY signaled that he was concerned at the contracts players were signing.  At the heart of it..it's hard to reconcile those two concepts.  you don't want Stramel, Yurov and picks...ok.  You don't want Robertson because it's gonna cost you 17 or 18 million a year..ok...what exactly are you hoping for here?

More mediocrity?

[buddha]

2 hours ago, Jason_R said:

I’ve assumed for a long time that Stevie told Chris it would be an 8-10 year rebuild. Three years of near misses could be ascribed to tough luck, but to lose Larkin like that was a black eye. I’m sure there were multiple conversations back-and-forth about how it came to that and how to bounce back from it but I also assume that Chris saw what the rest of us saw, which was no clear pathway to resolving the impasse. Yes Steve could not get rid of Larkin, Chris had to get rid of Steve.

Anyway, it needed to happen. I’m sure that almost every GM and every perspective GM would love the chance to run an original six franchise, with a dedicated and very wealthy ownership group, and a rabid fan base. They will get someone good and build a model franchise.

if he truly saw it as an 8-10 year process, he should have traded larkin rather than signing him to a long term deal.  i dont think yzerman saw it that way or else he doesnt make win now moves at the deadline this year.

 

[gehringer_2]

13 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

More mediocrity?

Risk aversion and/or lack of Imagination.

I think people underestimate the importance of imagination as a contributor to success, esp in times of change. If a manager can't imagine it, he won't even look for the path to get there. Yzerman appears not to have liked any of the paths he saw available. He couldn't imagine a successful future down any of them other than the one he had chosen, But of course the future will prove that there are successful futures out there down many of paths Yzerman saw no future in or saw too much risk in.

[buddha]

19 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

More mediocrity?

if yzerman had stayed, that's what we would have got.

now they have a chance to move beyond that by taking a step back now in order to make a step forward later.

but who knows what illitch is thinking.  once again, he makes a move late in the game.

[gehringer_2]

6 minutes ago, buddha said:

if he truly saw it as an 8-10 year process, he should have traded larkin rather than signing him to a long term deal.  i dont think yzerman saw it that way or else he doesnt make win now moves at the deadline this year.

 

this. And going back to his introductory pressers, he always said the plan was to become successful during Larkin's prime - in fact it was to build around the strength of the Larkin & Bertuzzi line.

Edited July 15 by gehringer_2

[Shinzaki]

I think the issues with Larkin started with the Bert trade and built from there.  SY never replaced Bert's production and snarl on the top line and then he didn't add at the deadline until this year.

If you keep promising your kid that you'll take him to the zoo...you better take him to the zoo or you'll wind up in a Harry Chapin song

[sagnam]

I wonder if packing the front office with ex-teammates rather than skilled talent evaluators played a part. I don’t know if that’s something he didn’t do in Tampa to say that’s what went wrong here, I just doubt that the best people for key jobs in the front office all just so happened to play on the same team with the GM back in the day.

[gehringer_2]

41 minutes ago, Shinzaki said:

If you keep promising your kid that you'll take him to the zoo...you better take him to the zoo or you'll wind up in a Harry Chapin song

Post of the day

[NorthWoods]

It's a theory.

 

[Jason_R]

 

It is a coveted job. Wings have a great arena and resources. Ilitch has an open mind about structure; do you want a single VP/GM or do you want to split into two separate roles? He will cast a wide net, including Draper and Horcoff, but will get a ton of interest from external candidates. Friedman floated the name of Brendan Shanahan, who "left Toronto a lot better than he found it."

I have no interest in Draper or Horcoff, but you better believe I'd interview them to find out what went wrong. 

[Hongbit]

3 hours ago, NorthWoods said:

It's a theory.

 

The Chiclets guys have referred to him as Stevie Bonghits for years.

[Hongbit]

48 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

 

It is a coveted job. Wings have a great arena and resources. Ilitch has an open mind about structure; do you want a single VP/GM or do you want to split into two separate roles? He will cast a wide net, including Draper and Horcoff, but will get a ton of interest from external candidates. Friedman floated the name of Brendan Shanahan, who "left Toronto a lot better than he found it."

I have no interest in Draper or Horcoff, but you better believe I'd interview them to find out what went wrong. 

I agree.  As much as the guys playing are too young to understand, all of the  front office folks know what this franchise has been and can be again.