Yzerman steps down as GM

[buddha]

1 hour ago, KL2 said:

Not always sometimes just rushing to remove people isn’t the right move either. Anybody in management knows that. 
 

I think it’s a bit of yzerman being burned out and not giving 100 and illitch seeing the offseason and seeing no attempts to improve or move forward and saying enough. Anybody available now would be available next offseason and it’s unlikely someone like say Nill we be more available. So he made the move now to give the new person a year to figure it out and come into next offseason with a way to move forward

he's had seven years to asses.  if anything, what he DID DO was rush to remove people.  if you werent happy with the results or the direction the franchise waa going at the end of the year, why wait to make a move?  and then rush a move during the edvinsson negotiations and the middle of the larkin trade drama?

its terrible timing.

it could be that yzerman had enough and begged out.  that's possible too.

[gehringer_2]

50 minutes ago, buddha said:

it could be that yzerman had enough and begged out.  that's possible too.

certainly possible. One thing that mitigates against that  - I think - would be that if Yzerman went to Ilitch and said "I'm done", he might have stayed put, and they put the together the search for his replacement and announce the move when they had the replacement. Maybe - or maybe not.

[buddha]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

certainly possible. One thing that mitigates against that  - I think - would be that if Yzerman went to Ilitch and said "I'm done", he might have stayed put, and they put the together the search for his replacement and announce the move when they had the replacement. Maybe - or maybe not.

from wojo:

"Yzerman is a great hockey mind and leader. That doesn't change because it didn't work here. My guess is, with the Larkin impasse, he knew it would take longer to turn around. He didn't want that and I assume Chris Ilitch didn't either. Can we call it a semi-mutual parting?"

[buddha]

the scary undercurrent from that post is that illitch doesnt want the turnaround to take much longer, which means the next gm will be under the gun to win now.

which - if true - would be a huge mistake, imo.

but it also means robertson for larkin would be back on the table?

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

the scary undercurrent from that post is that illitch doesnt want the turnaround to take much longer, which means the next gm will be under the gun to win now.

which - if true - would be a huge mistake, imo.

but it also means robertson for larkin would be back on the table?

Maybe the positive is that if guy comes in with some urgency they will clean house. I'm a big believer that great orgs run on great people or at least people perfectly fitted to their tasks - find the people, they will find a way, and everything takes care of itself. IMHO, the Wings do not currently have the right people.

 

Edited July 18 by gehringer_2

[buddha]

21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Maybe the positive is that if guy comes in with some urgency they will clean house. I'm a big believer that great orgs run on great people or at least people perfectly fitted to their tasks - find the people, they will find a way, and everything takes care of itself. IMHO, the Wings do not currently have the right people.

 

clean house FOR WHAT?  

the time to clean house was before the draft - like everyone else did - or at the trade deadline.

because he did nothing and let yzerman handle free agency and the draft, now they are semi-locked into the roster as is.

i think its more likely larkin gets traded for robertson now.  and then they pay robertson 16-17m a year in order to sign here.

[Jason_R]

It is strange and alarming that the change occurred as late as it did. 

If the whole NHL knew that Yzerman and Larkin were on the outs, you have to think Ilitch knew also. OTOH everyone in the NHL was surprised by the number of Team USA players who started to call their shots. 

Before Larkin’s demand, it was possible to imagine that a few tweaks and some internal growth could get the team into the playoffs. After, that was wildly optimistic at best.

You have to think that Ilitch was pressing Stevie about the franchise’s direction well before Larkin”s announcement and Stevie was saying we are right on the edge, but the players collapsed. Larkin forced Ilitch to accelerate those conversations.

I assume the front office has been scrambling since the Larkin announcement. Stevie must have been too slow or stubborn to chart an to chart a new course and Chris decided it was time to move on. 

[gehringer_2]

39 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

but the players collapsed.

Yzerman built a team that was bound to collapse as other teams upped the pressure in their playoff runs. The team is soft, and that was never Larkin's fault and if Yzerman thought it was Larkin's job to fix that he's dumber than I ever gave him credit for. And when I say soft I don't mean they lack heart, that's unfair. As a group, they simply do not have enough of the physical attributes in speed and strength needed across the board to play playoff level hockey. The cannot match other teams when those teams start to play the game harder. That's why the collapse comes in April and why it keeps being repeated, because it's the same team construction.

Edited July 19 by gehringer_2

[buddha]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

Yzerman built a team that was bound to collapse as other teams upped the pressure in their playoff runs. The team is soft, and that was never Larkin's fault and if Yzerman thought it was Larkin's job to fix that he's dumber than I ever gave him credit for. And when I say soft I don't mean they lack heart, that's unfair. As a group, they simply do not have enough of the physical attributes in speed and strength needed across the board to play playoff level hockey. The cannot match other teams when those teams start to play the game harder. That's why the collapse comes in April and why it keeps being repeated, because it's the same team construction.

dude.  larkin was a HUGE part of that collapse.  especially this year.

[gehringer_2]

16 minutes ago, buddha said:

dude.  larkin was a HUGE part of that collapse.  especially this year.

sure - because he is one of those skill only players that are not enough when crunch time comes. It's also been reported that at some point he was playing on a bad MCL, but I've lost track of where in the schedule that lined up. I didn't think he was skating particularly well late in the season (for him). Maybe he was doggin it, but getting through a full season in one piece has always been Larkin's problem. Is he supposed to have some kind of magic wand he's been refusing to wave over himself?

I just have a lot of trouble trying to single out players for blame when the team is so manifestly mal-constructed. It's fine to consider psychological factors, but team construction is more in keeping with Occam's razor than a lot of speculation about players who've played the game hard all their lives suddenly deciding to give it up out of ennui.

Gibson being overworked and the absence of a capable backup was also a big factor. I'm certain Dylan should have handled that better too. 

Edited July 19 by gehringer_2

[Jason_R]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

Yzerman built a team that was bound to collapse as other teams upped the pressure in their playoff runs. The team is soft, and that was never Larkin's fault and if Yzerman thought it was Larkin's job to fix that he's dumber than I ever gave him credit for. And when I say soft I don't mean they lack heart, that's unfair. As a group, they simply do not have enough of the physical attributes in speed and strength needed across the board to play playoff level hockey. The cannot match other teams when those teams start to play the game harder. That's why the collapse comes in April and why it keeps being repeated, because it's the same team construction.

Yes, my point was that I assume Stevie was telling Ilitch that he had done all he could to put the team over the hump but placed blame on the team when they failed to make the playoffs.

I agree that these were the players that Stevie chose and that this argument rings hollow. Ultimately Chris came to feel the same way. 

I hope Chris hires a senior executive to help establish a cohesive culture throughout the organization, and then hires one of the talented, up-and-coming AGM candidates who is heavy on analytics. Then let your GM build an entire analytics operation and rebuild the scouting staff. 

[Shinzaki]

One interesting name for the hockey side I saw floated today...

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/team/martin-lapointe

[slothfacekilla]

Do any hockey journalists do any actual researching and reporting these days?  Every time I see any news on the GM search or Yzerman stepping down it is always what the "reporter" feels or thinks.  Ansar Khan "thinks" the Larkins stuff started when he didn't get the C right away.  Friedman "thinks" that Shanahan "could" be interested in the job.

To borrow their own verbiage it feels like no one actually spends the time to try to figure out what happened or is happening and just wants to get their opinions out into the world asap. 

[gehringer_2]

8 minutes ago, slothfacekilla said:

Do any hockey journalists do any actual researching and reporting these days?  Every time I see any news on the GM search or Yzerman stepping down it is always what the "reporter" feels or thinks.  Ansar Khan "thinks" the Larkins stuff started when he didn't get the C right away.  Friedman "thinks" that Shanahan "could" be interested in the job.

To borrow their own verbiage it feels like no one actually spends the time to try to figure out what happened or is happening and just wants to get their opinions out into the world asap. 

When media income is based on clicks as much as fact, speculation pays better than reporting because fiction is easier to make more fun than fact.

Also - it's been commented on before, since the teams and the players don't need the sport journalists anymore, the journalist have no leverage to get people to tell them things. Funny I was thinking along the same lines this morning before I saw this post that back in the day if something like this happened one of the big guns like Joe Falls or Pete Waldemier would sooner or later get the inside dish about what was happening. Then again,  maybe half of what those guys wrote was BS too.

[buddha]

1 hour ago, slothfacekilla said:

Do any hockey journalists do any actual researching and reporting these days?  Every time I see any news on the GM search or Yzerman stepping down it is always what the "reporter" feels or thinks.  Ansar Khan "thinks" the Larkins stuff started when he didn't get the C right away.  Friedman "thinks" that Shanahan "could" be interested in the job.

To borrow their own verbiage it feels like no one actually spends the time to try to figure out what happened or is happening and just wants to get their opinions out into the world asap. 

they write that so they dont burn their sources.

[KL2]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

they write that so they dont burn their sources.

Thats not how on background or unnamed or journalism works

[Jason_R]

30 minutes ago, KL2 said:

Thats not how on background or unnamed or journalism works

Tell us how it works then. 

[slothfacekilla]

21 hours ago, buddha said:

they write that so they dont burn their sources.

That feels doubtful when HSJ immediately contradicts Khan.  I also am not sure why you would need to protect a source saying someone is interested in a GM job.  I'm sure it is the case for some people (actually Friedman is usually pretty obvious on twitter when he knows knows something but won't say it outright) but in these cases I find it tough to believe it is protecting sources rather than just throwing **** at the wall and seeing what sticks.

[Jason_R]

40 minutes ago, slothfacekilla said:

That feels doubtful when HSJ immediately contradicts Khan.  I also am not sure why you would need to protect a source saying someone is interested in a GM job.  I'm sure it is the case for some people (actually Friedman is usually pretty obvious on twitter when he knows knows something but won't say it outright) but in these cases I find it tough to believe it is protecting sources rather than just throwing **** at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Lots of different people can be sources. The things HSJ has reported seem like they are coming from Stevie or his allies. Maybe his brother?

But I don’t buy for a second that getting punted upstairs was Stevie’s idea. He’s had to answer questions about three late season collapses in a row. Then he had to answer for Dylan’s trade demand. When the Larkin situation wasn’t resolved at the draft, and Chris realized it may last into the season, and when he started to see that Stevie himself was a barrier to getting it resolved, and was maybe even a barrier to adding outside talent, he made the decision, even though the timing was awkward. 

[slothfacekilla]

I feel like if Chris suddenly didn't think Yzerman could do the job at this awkward time he wouldn't let Yzerman keep the GM powers while they do the search, but that's just my guess.  But it's all speculation from all sides so who knows.

[Jason_R]

2 hours ago, slothfacekilla said:

I feel like if Chris suddenly didn't think Yzerman could do the job at this awkward time he wouldn't let Yzerman keep the GM powers while they do the search, but that's just my guess.  But it's all speculation from all sides so who knows.

It is one thing to say he is remaining in the role during the search, it would be another thing to allow him to make binding decisions, which I’m sure is not going to happen.  

[Mr.TaterSalad]

5 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

It is one thing to say he is remaining in the role during the search, it would be another thing to allow him to make binding decisions, which I’m sure is not going to happen.  

Aren't draft picks and free agent signings binding decisions though? Why not transition him before the draft or start of free agency?

[Jason_R]

Nobody knows what happened behind the scenes but it seems like Chris fired him as soon as he made the decision he needed to be fired. 

Had Larkin demanded a trade the day after the season, I assume Chris would have approached the offseason differently. But Larkin’s awkward decision to demand a trade at an awkward time resulted in an awkward timing of Stevie’s firing.

I assume that Chris saw things spinning out of control just like the rest of us did, getting blindsided by the trade request and then not seeing any clear path forward from it. He just decided he needed to act, and he acted as soon as he made the decision.

[buddha]

45 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

Nobody knows what happened behind the scenes but it seems like Chris fired him as soon as he made the decision he needed to be fired. 

Had Larkin demanded a trade the day after the season, I assume Chris would have approached the offseason differently. But Larkin’s awkward decision to demand a trade at an awkward time resulted in an awkward timing of Stevie’s firing.

I assume that Chris saw things spinning out of control just like the rest of us did, getting blindsided by the trade request and then not seeing any clear path forward from it. He just decided he needed to act, and he acted as soon as he made the decision.

the fact that it took him this long to make the decision is the issue.  

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

Nobody knows what happened behind the scenes but it seems like Chris fired him as soon as he made the decision he needed to be fired. 

Had Larkin demanded a trade the day after the season, I assume Chris would have approached the offseason differently. But Larkin’s awkward decision to demand a trade at an awkward time resulted in an awkward timing of Stevie’s firing.

I assume that Chris saw things spinning out of control just like the rest of us did, getting blindsided by the trade request and then not seeing any clear path forward from it. He just decided he needed to act, and he acted as soon as he made the decision.

related question: do we even know that  Larkin's request to be moved hadn't been made some unknown time previous to the leak? From a logical POV, why would have have waited to make the request if all that could do was decrease the chance of it happening?

While it is true that if Yzerman had to go it would have been best done as soon as they missed the playoffs, that's always an easier analysis after the fact. Maybe Yzerman was working something that could have been a positive outcome but in the end couldn't bring it off.

Edited July 20 by gehringer_2