Player Discussion Joe Morrow

[LSCII]

Nothing to do with a GM re-signing repetitive #4/#5 dmen to long-term deals, on top of JM Liles just this past offseason???

Again, people always blame the coach, but if the GM shared these concerns about the kids sitting too long and the GM felt Morrow and Chiller could/should play, then the GM didn't have to sign all these guys. He had a choice and he made it. And on the flip side, if you were the coach how comfortable would you feel sitting the guys your boss just signed? In every other organization we acknowledge a pressure for coaches/managers to play guys their management team acquired, but just because we have a stigma attached to this particular coach, we decide to flip that narrative on its head to suit our position.

The roster is mostly on the GM. He should bear most of the blame if it has gaping holes, way too much depth in some spots, slows growth of youngsters, etc. These things are mostly on Sweeney. If Morrow or anyone else is being wronged here, it's his fault. He's the player development expert...maybe he can step up. IF, of course, you think they're being wronged. I don't share that position because I don't think those players are all that great, but I would rather see them playing than the guys our GM insists on keeping.

So you see Sweeney as resigning both McQuaid and KMiller as him operating independently and against the wishes of his head coach by bringing those guys back? Really? Aren't those two the literal embodiment of what Claude covets on d? Stay at home guys who play a somewhat physical game, but offer zero upside on the offensive side? That's his freaking ideal, and if you ask me, Sweeney brought those guys back because of Claude, and nothing else.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Nothing to do with a GM re-signing repetitive #4/#5 dmen to long-term deals, on top of JM Liles just this past offseason???

Again, people always blame the coach, but if the GM shared these concerns about the kids sitting too long and the GM felt Morrow and Chiller could/should play, then the GM didn't have to sign all these guys. He had a choice and he made it. And on the flip side, if you were the coach how comfortable would you feel sitting the guys your boss just signed? In every other organization we acknowledge a pressure for coaches/managers to play guys their management team acquired, but just because we have a stigma attached to this particular coach, we decide to flip that narrative on its head to suit our position.

The roster is mostly on the GM. He should bear most of the blame if it has gaping holes, way too much depth in some spots, slows growth of youngsters, etc. These things are mostly on Sweeney. If Morrow or anyone else is being wronged here, it's his fault. He's the player development expert...maybe he can step up. IF, of course, you think they're being wronged. I don't share that position because I don't think those players are all that great, but I would rather see them playing than the guys our GM insists on keeping.

And if Sweeney doesn't sign any veteran depth players, and relies on Carlo, Miller, Morrow, etc., and they fail...people kill him for that.

This has been discussed before, but it's the COACH who decides who plays, not the GM. I have seen several former GM's asked about this dynamic (most recently it was Neil Smith on the NHL Network), and they all said it was their job to sign players, bring them up from the minors, and what not, but that they had never told a coach who to play (presumably because it would undermine the coach's authority in the room).

I assume that the GM and coach must be in agreement to a large extent on who is playing, and at the point where the GM and coach get a certain distance apart, one of them will be gone. I think that point is either fast approaching or already here and that Clode will be the one leaving.

 

[NDiesel]

So you see Sweeney as resigning both McQuaid and KMiller as him operating independently and against the wishes of his head coach by bringing those guys back? Really? Aren't those two the literal embodiment of what Claude covets on d? Stay at home guys who play a somewhat physical game, but offer zero upside on the offensive side? That's his freaking ideal, and if you ask me, Sweeney brought those guys back because of Claude, and nothing else.

I think people underestimate just how much to upcoming expansion draft has to do with a lot of moves this offseason/season - not just from Sweeney - by all gms.

I'm sure Vegas would love one of McQuaid/K. Miller for their 3rd pairing, via draft or trade.

 

[bp13]

So you see Sweeney as resigning both McQuaid and KMiller as him operating independently and against the wishes of his head coach by bringing those guys back? Really? Aren't those two the literal embodiment of what Claude covets on d? Stay at home guys who play a somewhat physical game, but offer zero upside on the offensive side? That's his freaking ideal, and if you ask me, Sweeney brought those guys back because of Claude, and nothing else.

Everybody comes back to this crap that Julien somehow builds the roster.

Look, there is ZERO question that any coach has influence over a roster, ok? We all know that. But ultimately responsibility in that area falls to a GM. I mean if the GM doesn't own that, what does he own?

If youth aren't being developed on a team with no present day shot to compete, it's largely on the GM. And that's why I said "largely". Yes the coach is going to play guys he likes more often than not (though there have absolutely been instances of this and every coach playing guys he doesn't like to suit his boss). But it's still on the GM to maintain the right balance between competing tonight and developing players. If people think that balance is off, it's 100% on the GM. If Sweeney created a situation where the coach has all the guys he wants and no need or desire for kids, and the GM feels that's wrong, then it's on the GM to fix it.

I'm not complaining about getting Joe Morrow more ice because I think he's a JAG just like McQuaid, Miller and Liles so I think the difference is pretty much nothing between them, but if people are actually upset about this, I'd look to the GM who accumulated all these pylons for the defense. He had the choice not to. We didn't need McQuaid AND Kevan Miller. Liles wasn't good enough to supplant Colin Miller and Morrow on a mediocre roster looking to retool. But he signed them. And regardless of whether his coach wanted him to, if it's a net negative for the franchise, it's on the GM.

 

[SPLBRUIN]

Morrow like C. Miller and some of the other talented youngsters must be on pins and needles when they play, one mistake and they face possible ice time loss or the pressbox, meanwhile other veterans like McQuaid/K Miller can make numerous mistakes with no consequences.

 

[bp13]

And if Sweeney doesn't sign any veteran depth players, and relies on Carlo, Miller, Morrow, etc., and they fail...people kill him for that.

This has been discussed before, but it's the COACH who decides who plays, not the GM. I have seen several former GM's asked about this dynamic (most recently it was Neil Smith on the NHL Network), and they all said it was their job to sign players, bring them up from the minors, and what not, but that they had never told a coach who to play (presumably because it would undermine the coach's authority in the room).

I assume that the GM and coach must be in agreement to a large extent on who is playing, and at the point where the GM and coach get a certain distance apart, one of them will be gone. I think that point is either fast approaching or already here and that Clode will be the one leaving.

It is on the coach to decide who plays. Agreed 100%. And it's on the GM to decide who is available for him to play. It seems to me that's the issue...I mean that was my point. IF the GM didn't want redundant, stone-hands d-men on the roster for the coach to use, he could just not re-sign them. It's that easy. And if the coach didn't like it, well, tough ****. The coach works for the GM, not the other way around.

And YES, YES, YES I understand the coach and GM works together. I could better ask some guys here if the GM even has a role.

 

[BruinDust]

I think people underestimate just how much to upcoming expansion draft has to do with a lot of moves this offseason/season - not just from Sweeney - by all gms.

I'm sure Vegas would love one of McQuaid/K. Miller for their 3rd pairing, via draft or trade.

You can be certain that Vegas will have 6 D-men available to them they would prefer over McQuaid or Miller.

That's not to say they won't claim one of them. But let's not pretend that Miller and McQuaid are some sort of obvious choices to be taken by Vegas. Especially when you consider both have term left on their deals.

 

[BNHL]

Morrow like C. Miller and some of the other talented youngsters must be on pins and needles when they play, one mistake and they face possible ice time loss or the pressbox, meanwhile other veterans like McQuaid/K Miller can make numerous mistakes with no consequences.

Exactly. I can't imagine. By Morrow's reaction to the goal that he had some responsibility for,his reaction was priceless. "That's all for me folks".

 

[wintersej]

So you see Sweeney as resigning both McQuaid and KMiller as him operating independently and against the wishes of his head coach by bringing those guys back? Really? Aren't those two the literal embodiment of what Claude covets on d? Stay at home guys who play a somewhat physical game, but offer zero upside on the offensive side? That's his freaking ideal, and if you ask me, Sweeney brought those guys back because of Claude, and nothing else.

Yet Krug is 2nd on the team in TOI. Maybe, just maybe, the team didn't have faith in Colin and Morrow and didn't expect a guy like Carlo to come out if the draft so quickly. Maybe, just maybe, filling a couple D spots with average to below average guys making 2.5-2.75m seemed like a better idea than overpaying in freeagency for a Sekera type and busting the long term budget. Look at the drafting, are McAvoy, Zboril and Lauzon stay at home knuckle draggers?

 

[bp13]

You can be certain that Vegas will have 6 D-men available to them they would prefer over McQuaid or Miller.

That's not to say they won't claim one of them. But let's not pretend that Miller and McQuaid are some sort of obvious choices to be taken by Vegas. Especially when you consider both have term left on their deals.

Agreed.

With the expansion draft being yet another, what's the complete list of Sweeney's job excuses? I'm trying to build a job description for him, but so far all I have is what he isn't responsible for. Let's see...

1. Trades are hard, so I can't be expected to make them, certainly not during the season when we need them.
2. The coach has influence over the roster too, so if it sucks or ice time skews where fans don't like it, that's not on me. That's on the coach too.
3. Cam Neely, my boss, loves grit and leadership, so signing an old David Backes to a long-term deal and then not really building the right lines to suit his strengths is Cam's fault.
4. I can't be blamed for re-signing Liles, Kevan and McQuaid because of #2, see above, oh, and the expansion draft. Don't forget the expansion draft!

So what does this guy do? He just drafts? That's a cushy GM gig if you ask me.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

It is on the coach to decide who plays. Agreed 100%. And it's on the GM to decide who is available for him to play. It seems to me that's the issue...I mean that was my point. IF the GM didn't want redundant, stone-hands d-men on the roster for the coach to use, he could just not re-sign them. It's that easy. And if the coach didn't like it, well, tough ****. The coach works for the GM, not the other way around.

And YES, YES, YES I understand the coach and GM works together. I could better ask some guys here if the GM even has a role.

I'm not sure what your point is?

The job of the GM is to build a well-rounded roster that includes both veterans and young options. We can go back and forth about how talented these guys are all day, but the B's have both on D.

The job of the coach is to win games and presumably play the best players. Depending on the situation, there should also be a certain amount of development going on. I don't think Clode's handling of the young D (except Carlo) has been beneficial to their development this year or last.

Just because Killer, McQ, and Liles are on the roster doesn't mean Clode has to play them. He plays them because he wants to play them.

 

[NDiesel]

Agreed.

With the expansion draft being yet another, what's the complete list of Sweeney's job excuses? I'm trying to build a job description for him, but so far all I have is what he isn't responsible for. Let's see...

1. Trades are hard, so I can't be expected to make them, certainly not during the season when we need them.
2. The coach has influence over the roster too, so if it sucks or ice time skews where fans don't like it, that's not on me. That's on the coach too.
3. Cam Neely, my boss, loves grit and leadership, so signing an old David Backes to a long-term deal and then not really building the right lines to suit his strengths is Cam's fault.
4. I can't be blamed for re-signing Liles, Kevan and McQuaid because of #2, see above, oh, and the expansion draft. Don't forget the expansion draft!

So what does this guy do? He just drafts? That's a cushy GM gig if you ask me.

Damn I'm glad people on these forums aren't my boss.

Two years on the job where half of his contributions can't even be measured yet and we want him gone. Doesn't sound like a cushy gig to me.

 

[bp13]

I'm not sure what your point is?

The job of the GM is to build a well-rounded roster that includes both veterans and young options. We can go back and forth about how talented these guys are all day, but the B's have both on D.

The job of the coach is to win games and presumably play the best players. Depending on the situation, there should also be a certain amount of development going on. I don't think Clode's handling of the young D (except Carlo) has been beneficial to their development this year or last.

Just because Killer, McQ, and Liles are on the roster doesn't mean Clode has to play them. He plays them because he wants to play them.

Right. Or more accurately, he plays them because he thinks they give him the best chance to win. His job isn't to develop kids for the future, it's to win tonight. With very few exceptions, that's how he does his job.

My point is that if that's the wrong decision on his part, it's on the GM to fix it. Either don't give him the players with whom he can make that wrong decision, or fire him. And I would argue that since the GM already gave him all of these guys and had to know he'd play them, he's on the hook too. Roster construction is the GM's ultimate responsibility, and he should be on the hook for it. It matters little whether the coach has SOME influence on the roster. OF course he does, just like the GM has SOME influence on ice time. But ultimately they each have final responsibility for their jobs, and the GM owns the roster. If the roster is built for a coach to misuse it and lose, then that's on the GM to fix. But he managed its construction, and he isn't fixing it.

 

[bp13]

Damn I'm glad people on these forums aren't my boss.

Two years on the job where half of his contributions can't even be measured yet and we want him gone. Doesn't sound like a cushy gig to me.

Did I say I want him gone? Where did I say that?

I said I wanted him taking fair blame for what he owns. The roster, the draft, etc. That's all I ask. I don't want people expanding the responsibility of the coach just to blame him for everything. Or providing cover like "expansion draft", "Neely forced that deal", "trades are hard" every time the GM screws up. He should own what's on the job description, plain and simple.

 

[Ratty]

I can't believe the GM has no say in whom the coach chooses to play. If a team, for example, has an interest in a certain player for trade purposes, and he hasn't played much, the GM should instruct the coach to play him more, to showcase his strengths.

Also, if Sweeney allows the coach to let a player rot on the 9th floor, he's derelict in his duty. That player may not meet the coach's standards, but he has to play, at least intermittently, to either develop or to improve his trade value.

 

[NDiesel]

Did I say I want him gone? Where did I say that?

I said I wanted him taking fair blame for what he owns. The roster, the draft, etc. That's all I ask. I don't want people expanding the responsibility of the coach just to blame him for everything. Or providing cover like "expansion draft", "Neely forced that deal", "trades are hard" every time the GM screws up. He should own what's on the job description, plain and simple.

I'm not really commenting on the trades are hard or Neely forced the deal, however how can you say that the expansion draft does not play a roll? Penguins are talking about buying out Fleury, terrible asset management but every team knows they have to because of the expansion draft. Ducks rushed into trading Andersen earlier than they had to. Lots of players being re-signed for 2 year contracts in order to expose them in the draft. It has an effect, deny it if you really want to, but it does.

I have not seen Sweeney screw up often, contrary to what many believe here. People keep calling for him to make a trade just for the sake of it. What happens when he trades away Carlo or McAvoy, or a guy people here want to keep for less than their value? Then instead of people saying "trades are hard" everyone will be *****ing that he forced a trade.

Everyone looks at things in different ways. I'm happy with them standing pat, seeing what they have in this plethora of prospects next season and then making a trade at that point. I know this is HF so prospects are highly rated, but I don't think guys like Debrusk and Zboril are going to give us much of a return, so unless you want Carlo or McAvoy gone for a legit player, it's best to just stand pat IN MY OPINION.

 

[Dr Hook]

Also, if Sweeney allows the coach to let a player rot on the 9th floor, he's derelict in his duty. That player may not meet the coach's standards, but he has to play, at least intermittently, to either develop or to improve his trade value.

I agree with this completely. If a players is not good enough to play for the team, then he has no business on the team. If a player can't be trusted by the coach to be played even to drive up his value, then why keep him? Far better to try and trade him for what you can get, or if you think there is some potential or no one wants him, send him to the AHL. Those extra roster spots should be for role players and fill-in guys who will see ice time periodically. We should have a 7th d-man or 13th forward that can get the job done, even while acknowledging that it wouldn't be our first choice. And this goes not only for Morrow, but Hayes too.

 

[bp13]

As an aside, this team lost to the Islanders yesterday 4-0 at home. It's a somewhat interesting debate to argue ice time for the #6 dman, but these guys don't decide games. The better players win and lose games for your team, for the most part. Not sure we need to spend much time debating ice time for Joe Morrow in the wake of that loss. We ought to be looking at Bergeron, Krejci, Chara, Rask, Marchand, Pastrnak, Backes, etc. Half of those guys have the talent to win that game themselves.

 

[the overrated]

I'm not sure what your point is?

The job of the GM is to build a well-rounded roster that includes both veterans and young options. We can go back and forth about how talented these guys are all day, but the B's have both on D.

The job of the coach is to win games and presumably play the best players. Depending on the situation, there should also be a certain amount of development going on. I don't think Clode's handling of the young D (except Carlo) has been beneficial to their development this year or last.

Just because Killer, McQ, and Liles are on the roster doesn't mean Clode has to play them. He plays them because he wants to play them.

Your last sentence begs the question: *why* does Claude want to play them? IMHO, it's because he, for a variety of reasons, feels the team is more likely to win with the likes of McQuaid, Miller or Liles, than with a younger player that's still going through the growing pains & the issues/errors that might come with those pains. Traditionally, coach's job is to win games, not to develop players. There are certainly times where a coach has been given the leash long enough to have some rough, ugly games because of mistakes that the youths are making, but I think it's safe to say that Julien isn't in that spot right now. He's presumably well aware that another DNQ will cost him his job (if he lasts long enough to DNQ, that is). You mention "a certain level of development, and I wonder what Julien's motivation to develop those young players, just to be altruistic for his replacement?

For me, many of the complaints about who Julien is playing has to be shared with Sweeney. Sweeney is the one that retained a coach that's known for preferring older players at the expense of the kids, and then Sweeney's the one that kept a crew of older players for Julien to play. He full-on created the atmosphere that enabled the situation to play out the way it has. To use a somewhat crass analogy: if I give a pyromaniac matches & kindling, don't I share some of the blame when he starts a fire?

If Sweeney really & truly wanted the push the development of the young players, there were things he easily could've done to enable that. Not retain almost the entire d-core that has been 'meh' for a few seasons now would've been one way; changing coaches to one that is more likely to play kids than vets would've been another. Sweeney instead did the exact opposite, and yet seemingly holds very little blame for the way the handling of players has played out. Julien owns a lot of it, but Sweeney owns a lot, too.

And to bring it back to the player that this thread is about: A lot of us predicted, before the season started, that Morrow would be competing with Colin Miller, not the other players on the roster, for a playing spot. And he's been outplayed by C.Miller. If there were more roles available to him, he likely would've gotten more PT this season.

 

[NDiesel]

You can be certain that Vegas will have 6 D-men available to them they would prefer over McQuaid or Miller.

That's not to say they won't claim one of them. But let's not pretend that Miller and McQuaid are some sort of obvious choices to be taken by Vegas. Especially when you consider both have term left on their deals.

If you believe some of the mock drafts they have guys like Luke Schenn, Alex Petrovic, Luca Sbisa going to Vegas. You don't think Miller or McQuaid could be an improvement over them or the 7th guy?

 

[Glove Malfunction]

I'm not sure what your point is?

The job of the GM is to build a well-rounded roster that includes both veterans and young options. We can go back and forth about how talented these guys are all day, but the B's have both on D.

The job of the coach is to win games and presumably play the best players. Depending on the situation, there should also be a certain amount of development going on. I don't think Clode's handling of the young D (except Carlo) has been beneficial to their development this year or last.

Just because Killer, McQ, and Liles are on the roster doesn't mean Clode has to play them. He plays them because he wants to play them.

I think there's a corrolary to that Joe. He plays them because he doesn't have any better options. That's on the GM, although I am in agreement with wintersej, that paying Miller and McQuaid was a beter alternative to overpaying for a Sekera type of guy, who's not likely to be a difference maker anyway. All that said, I think the bigger issue is the offense, so I'm not sure why there's so much focus on the D, except that this is in the Morrow thread...

 

[whatsbruin]

Morrow looked good again. Skates well. Has skills. Can pass.

Give me these types of D any day over the K.Miller of the world and their high glass/into the skates/icing type of breakouts.

Several posters say they are done with him.
Don't understand that mentality of giving a player one game after sitting for like 20 and judging him, but that's what's happened to JM his entire career here. It's not like you could tell Joe to play his game, and he'll be in the line up tomorrow even if he makes a mistake, just like all the other d'men do.
I'm not saying JM is a savior on D, just saying give him 10 to 15 games in a row, then evaluate.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

Did I say I want him gone? Where did I say that?

I said I wanted him taking fair blame for what he owns. The roster, the draft, etc. That's all I ask. I don't want people expanding the responsibility of the coach just to blame him for everything. Or providing cover like "expansion draft", "Neely forced that deal", "trades are hard" every time the GM screws up. He should own what's on the job description, plain and simple.

I can't argue with anything you said except for the "trades are hard" part, because, well, trades ARE hard. Do you want Sweeney giving Colorado what they're asking for in a deal for Landeskog? That's a situation (which is more common than not, think the Trouba saga earlier this season) where the better play is not to make a bad deal, rather than making a deal just for the sake of having done SOMETHING.

 

[bp13]

I can't argue with anything you said except for the "trades are hard" part, because, well, trades ARE hard. Do you want Sweeney giving Colorado what they're asking for in a deal for Landeskog? That's a situation (which is more common than not, think the Trouba saga earlier this season) where the better play is not to make a bad deal, rather than making a deal just for the sake of having done SOMETHING.

Trades are hard and so are wins when your team isn't good enough. I'm not saying I expect them both to happen, but ultimately if they don't someone has to own it.

If making trades, notably during the season, is so hard, then the GM needs to make better use of the offseason. So ultimately whether it has some truth or not, it's an excuse. Just like a mediocre roster will be an excuse for Julien when he's fired, but he'll still be fired if he loses.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

Trades are hard and so are wins when your team isn't good enough. I'm not saying I expect them both to happen, but ultimately if they don't someone has to own it.

If making trades, notably during the season, is so hard, then the GM needs to make better use of the offseason. So ultimately whether it has some truth or not, it's an excuse. Just like a mediocre roster will be an excuse for Julien when he's fired, but he'll still be fired if he loses.

Agreed 100%