Article: Why Don't Other Teams Follow Guerin's Model?

[mnfaninnc]

24 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

BG should have addressed it at least somewhat. is what I'm saying. Ya, I doubt the the two departing guys could say anything about it, which would tell me  the team team wants to sweep it under the rug and move on from an embarrassing situation especially since the last GM was let go for the same thing.

Willy, isn't this typical in corporate America? If a guy gets canned, most companies are not spilling the beans on him. If another HR guy calls trying to hire him, most prior HRs just admit he worked there and there is no recommendation or condemnation. 

Bill Guerin owed us absolutely no explanation on things. O'Hearn owed us no explanation. Logistics guy owed us no explanation and probably can't or his severance is gone. This kind of stuff stays within the organization all the time in all sectors of business. 

Why would you think you are owed any kind of explanation? That's just not how this works, not how any of this works! Even if the reporters asked Guerin in private what happened, they probably never were given a straight answer. So, they report nothing because there's nothing to report.

[Willy the poor boy]

2 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

Bill Guerin owed us absolutely no explanation on things.

Totally disagree. There was an outside investigation and 2 people are gone because of it. Of course he/they owe an explanation.

 

3 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

Even if the reporters asked Guerin in private what happened, they probably never were given a straight answer. So, they report nothing because there's nothing to report.

They (reporters) probably know, or at least have a good idea. My bet is they keep quiet to keep getting access. That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

[B1GKappa97]

23 hours ago, mnfaninnc said:

B1G, if you go back to look at my comments at the time, probably now permanently erased in the Vox black hole, I was very optimistic that we had gotten Goose2, I thought he would rebound and was in a poor situation in Ottawa, and that he did have similar stats to The Wall in the SHL. Obviously, Guerin had more information than I did in a quick little statistical search. 

Yep, I remember. You definitely called that one! I had my doubts but you were proven right. 

[B1GKappa97]

13 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

They (reporters) probably know, or at least have a good idea. My bet is they keep quiet to keep getting access. That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

I feel like we've gotten an explanation? Otherwise how would we know what happened? We know that the FO guy is gone because he did something naughty with the books. Likely something similar to that guy in the Jags organization who was skimming off the top. 

We also know that the staffer who filed the HR complaint felt he was verbally abused by the GM but that the team investigated, reported those results to the league, and neither felt it was to the level of a necessary termination. 

Sometimes personalities just don't mesh in a workplace and eventually those issues reach a tipping point. Do we really need the nitty gritty details of what exactly was said, out of context? What would that achieve? 

If it was as bad as you are trying to portray it to be, I imagine the GM would've gotten more than just a slap on the wrist considering how swiftly they canned Fenton for a similar issue. 

[Willy the poor boy]

2 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

I feel like we've gotten an explanation? Otherwise how would we know what happened? We know that the FO guy is gone because he did something naughty with the books. Likely something similar to that guy in the Jags organization who was skimming off the top. 

We also know that the staffer who filed the HR complaint felt he was verbally abused by the GM but that the team investigated, reported those results to the league, and neither felt it was to the level of a necessary termination. 

Sometimes personalities just don't mesh in a workplace and eventually those issues reach a tipping point. Do we really need the nitty gritty details of what exactly was said, out of context? What would that achieve? 

If it was as bad as you are trying to portray it to be, I imagine the GM would've gotten more than just a slap on the wrist considering how swiftly they canned Fenton for a similar issue. 

That's just it. Leo saving face? Two in a row? and rather abruptly I might add. And, I disagree with you. We don't know what happened.

[Pewterschmidt]

2 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

I feel like we've gotten an explanation? Otherwise how would we know what happened? We know that the FO guy is gone because he did something naughty with the books. Likely something similar to that guy in the Jags organization who was skimming off the top. 

We also know that the staffer who filed the HR complaint felt he was verbally abused by the GM but that the team investigated, reported those results to the league, and neither felt it was to the level of a necessary termination. 

Sometimes personalities just don't mesh in a workplace and eventually those issues reach a tipping point. Do we really need the nitty gritty details of what exactly was said, out of context? What would that achieve? 

If it was as bad as you are trying to portray it to be, I imagine the GM would've gotten more than just a slap on the wrist considering how swiftly they canned Fenton for a similar issue. 

Great post.  And my response in no way is a counter point.  BG has been earmarked as team USA GM for years now so he’s a little bit untouchable right now.  But if investigations become a pattern, knee jerk trading players in a huff become a pattern, unforced errors (5 yr extensions with no move clauses for fringe nhl’rs) become a pattern BG won’t be untouchable forever

[B1GKappa97]

9 minutes ago, Pewterschmidt said:

Great post.  And my response in no way is a counter point.  BG has been earmarked as team USA GM for years now so he’s a little bit untouchable right now.  But if investigations become a pattern, knee jerk trading players in a huff become a pattern, unforced errors (5 yr extensions with no move clauses for fringe nhl’rs) become a pattern BG won’t be untouchable forever

No one in professional sports is untouchable my man. They're all hired to be fired eventually. I don't know that Leipold would care about Team USA too much (its not like he makes money off that) to spare Billy some egg on his face if he deserved to be fired. 

To Guerin's credit the Freddy G contract is probably the worst move he's made and its just a $2.1M AAV. As much as the dead-cap from the buyouts suck this year, and will next year, it was an unfortunately necessary move that we knew would be due eventually as soon as we signed Parise and Suter to those contracts in 2012. 

Given that reality, I think what he's been able to do in the years since has been pretty outstanding. Its been rough this year but that's mainly due to the record during the rash of injuries, paired with the slow start under a coach the team tuned out, rather than any individual roster decisions he made. 

[Will D. Ness]

31 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

Legally speaking, the investigation was not compulsory.

[B1GKappa97]

22 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

That's just it. Leo saving face? Two in a row? and rather abruptly I might add. And, I disagree with you. We don't know what happened.

We don't know specific details, and likely never will, but we know what happened. 

Given that its been 4 years since we fired Fenton, I wouldn't consider that abrupt myself. Leipold didn't waste any time kicking Fenton to the curb when he learned he was creating a toxic workplace, but for Billy he'll make an exception? Idk man.. 

[Willy the poor boy]

4 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

We don't know specific details, and likely never will, but we know what happened. 

Given that its been 4 years since we fired Fenton, I wouldn't consider that abrupt myself. Leipold didn't waste any time kicking Fenton to the curb when he learned he was creating a toxic workplace, but for Billy he'll make an exception? Idk man.. 

Maybe not abrupt but two in a row for lack of self control, not a good look no matter how you spin it. With Fenton it was internal, with BG we see it publicly which leads me to believe it's likely worse behind closed doors. Yes, I think he made the exception to save face.

[Pewterschmidt]

39 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

I don't know that Leipold would care about Team USA too much (its not like he makes money off that) to spare Billy some egg on his face if he deserved to be fired.

I was referring to the investigation being presented to the league and the NHL saying "nothing to see here."  If BG is a re-tread GM on back nine of his career in a crap market with a crap org. maybe the league rules differently.  My point is given the BG's circumstances a dismissal of charges by NHL doesn't mean 100% vindication.  There may be some fire around BG, not just smoke.

[Pewterschmidt]

47 minutes ago, Will D. Ness said:

Legally speaking, the investigation was not compulsory.

please explain what this means to us non-law talkin' types

[B1GKappa97]

20 minutes ago, Pewterschmidt said:

I was referring to the investigation being presented to the league and the NHL saying "nothing to see here."  If BG is a re-tread GM on back nine of his career in a crap market with a crap org. maybe the league rules differently.  My point is given the BG's circumstances a dismissal of charges by NHL doesn't mean 100% vindication.  There may be some fire around BG, not just smoke.

But I hear that Gary Bettman hates MN so why wouldn't he try to make us look bad?! 

[Pewterschmidt]

7 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

But I hear that Gary Bettman hates MN so why wouldn't he try to make us look bad?! 

Because BG was the defacto Team USA GM (or maybe it had already been announced).  Why would Bettman give the NHL that black eye (Team USA is a proxy for the NHL).  Let Team Canada get all the negative PR for now.  

[Will D. Ness]

32 minutes ago, Pewterschmidt said:

please explain what this means to us non-law talkin' types

The investigation was self imposed so there is no obligation to let us hockey wilderness dudes in on it.

[Up North Guy]

5 hours ago, Willy the poor boy said:

Totally disagree. There was an outside investigation and 2 people are gone because of it. Of course he/they owe an explanation.

 

They (reporters) probably know, or at least have a good idea. My bet is they keep quiet to keep getting access. That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

Willy do you ever let up? We all get it. You have a big time dislike for BG. Did BG screw up? Yep, he probably did. Does it happen anywhere else? Yep, all the time. Is it not the perfect deal? Yep again. 

I truly doubt you will ever get the answer you apparently need so much. How about everyone just moves on and lets the sand flow through the hour glass?

[Willy the poor boy]

14 minutes ago, Up North Guy said:

Willy do you ever let up? We all get it. You have a big time dislike for BG. Did BG screw up? Yep, he probably did. Does it happen anywhere else? Yep, all the time. Is it not the perfect deal? Yep again. 

I truly doubt you will ever get the answer you apparently need so much. How about everyone just moves on and lets the sand flow through the hour glass?

I didn't bring it up, someone else did, and yes I'm gonna respond just like you responded anytime someone mentioned Deano had to go. Please explain the difference to me.

[Up North Guy]

27 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

I didn't bring it up, someone else did, and yes I'm gonna respond just like you responded anytime someone mentioned Deano had to go. Please explain the difference to me.

Touche' I guess

[mnfaninnc]

20 hours ago, Will D. Ness said:

The investigation was self imposed so there is no obligation to let us hockey wilderness dudes in on it.

This is about as good as layman's terms ever get!!!!!

[mnfaninnc]

17 hours ago, Up North Guy said:

Willy do you ever let up? We all get it.

There is only one solution: Willy mutates into a fly and is the fly on the wall in the FO when this is discussed. While there, though, perhaps we can get some insight on who they are looking to trade for, and who they like in the draft! 😉