News Article: Rachel Doerrie has left the Canucks

[rypper]

Ok, she says she's done "recon" on character and injury issues. Says the comment about nobody has anything good to say but people who benefit from it. Then goes on to ignore the character side of things and expand completely on the injury side of her recon.

Is that character assassination/slander or is that something we see every draft regarding players with injury history?

Does the comment "people with something to gain from it" only apply to his character or could that also point at the injury concerns? His family, agent, etc all benefit the higher he is drafted, injury concerns effect that.

I'm just not seeing the character assassination. That feels like an exaggeration. She went into no detail about that. if she came out and said "Man, he's such a little shit, who all his teammates hate, and is only where he is because his dad and brothers" yeah that's crossing the line.

 

[cabinessence]

Curious as to who the other candidates were. As this is a relatively new type of position. I see the Leafs have a staff of 7 in their research and development staff.

 

[Melvin]

Ok, she says she's done "recon" on character and injury issues. Says the comment about nobody has anything good to say but people who benefit from it. Then goes on to ignore the character side of things and expand completely on the injury side of her recon.

Is that character assassination/slander or is that something we see every draft regarding players with injury history?

Does the comment "people with something to gain from it" only apply to his character or could that also point at the injury concerns? His family, agent, etc all benefit the higher he is drafted, injury concerns effect that.

I'm just not seeing the character assassination. That feels like an exaggeration. She went into no detail about that. if she came out and said "Man, he's such a little shit, who all his teammates hate, and is only where he is because his dad and brothers" yeah that's crossing the line.

Wasn't the player in question literally drafted 4th overall? Why the f*** does anybody care? Good lord some of you people. "Slander," you'd think she caused the guy to fall off the board and now he's bussing tables at Joey's. Kid's going to be a millionaire in 2 years.

 

[timw33]

Wasn't the player in question literally drafted 4th overall? Why the f*** does anybody care? Good lord some of you people. "Slander," you'd think she caused the guy to fall off the board and now he's bussing tables at Joey's. Kid's going to be a millionaire in 2 years.

Anyone in hockey who said DeAngelo or Merkeley had "character issues" should be slapped with a civil suit for loss in draft position.

This is outrageous, we have never heard statements made about prospects pre-draft.

 

[God]

Actually it's perfectly fine to talk smack about a prospect if they end up being bad in the NHL, like Brian Burke did with Nail Yakupov, or like anonymous scouts saying Jordan Schroeder came across as cocky in the pre-draft interview, or like Bobby Clarke with Nolan Patrick.

It's not ok to do that if they become good.

 

[arttk]

Actually it's perfectly fine to talk smack about a prospect if they end up being bad in the NHL, like Brian Burke did with Nail Yakupov, or like anonymous scouts saying Jordan Schroeder came across as cocky in the pre-draft interview, or like Bobby Clarke with Nolan Patrick.

It's not ok to do that if they become good.

Honestly there is so much smack when analyst talks about prospects. Don’t have an engine is like code for don’t work hard and you can argue that is character as assassination. Don’t have hockey iq, that’s like another way to say the kid is dumb. This whole convo is really about making nothing into something.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

And to stir the pot, Rachel as a woman has more balls than most of us here to attach her real name on to her strong opinions.

I’ve checked out her IG. Believe me…. She doesn’t have balls.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

I’m ok with the hire and hiring women in NHL in general is great and past due BUT I don’t like how he was only going to hire a girl for this role. He specifically said he wanted to hire a female. Same as when Biden said his running mate would be a female but didn’t know who at the time. It’s putting optics over merit. Women should be hired in the same roles as men, but the best candidate should get the job, female or male , not an already determined gender to fill a space.

 

[God]

I’m ok with the hire and hiring women in NHL in general is great and past due BUT I don’t like how he was only going to hire a girl for this role. He specifically said he wanted to hire a female. Same as when Biden said his running mate would be a female but didn’t know who at the time. It’s putting optics over merit. Women should be hired in the same roles as men, but the best candidate should get the job, female or male , not an already determined gender to fill a space.

He said he wanted a diverse staff so that he could have different voices and perspectives in the room. He didn't say "I'm going to hire a woman".

 

[timw33]

I’m ok with the hire and hiring women in NHL in general is great and past due BUT I don’t like how he was only going to hire a girl for this role. He specifically said he wanted to hire a female. Same as when Biden said his running mate would be a female but didn’t know who at the time. It’s putting optics over merit. Women should be hired in the same roles as men, but the best candidate should get the job, female or male , not an already determined gender to fill a space.

You say this like we hired someone who is horribly under qualified for an entry-level department as an individual contributor on a team of analysts.

A man gets hired for this role and no one bats a ****ing eye and grants them all the benefit of the doubt in the world. A smart woman gets hired and it's "this is political correctness gone mad! this is affirmative action! let's deeply scrutinize everything they've ever said and not wait to see the work they do for our team!"

 

[God]

Also, I don't mean to cut at anyone with this comment, but if you look at this hire and immediately think "diversity hire", you really need to take a step back and examine your pre-conceptions and wonder if you might be biased in some way. She comes from an analytics background and she has worked with smart people in the NHL.

I cannot believe I saw comments here asking "Well what was she doing in the time after she got fired from the Devils" well sorry that she has a slight gap in her resume when she didn't have the connections to score a mean-nothing scouting/consultant role from the OBC, guess we should dock marks off the 22-year old there.

 

[F A N]

Comments like this are made by media about a couple players in every draft and this has been the case forever. This is nothing compared to what was written about Ryan Merkley, or even Anthony Mantha.

The only different thing here is that people didn't like who the comments were about, and that that player was very connected around the NHL.

First off, injury concerns are different. It is a frequent concern that causes players to drop in their draft year. Perhaps I'm getting old and people are using military style language I am not familiar with. I never heard any scout say they did an injury recon and then talk about nobody having anything good to say about the player that isn't connected to him or have something to game. Sounds like nobody had something good to say about how he is recovering from his injury is my interpretation if someone said that to me.

I'm not saying that scouts don't have nasty things to say about players. But they do so anonymously and or in private conversations that are not meant to be broadcasted. But IF we know a particular scout on the Canucks has an affinity for using nasty language to describe 17 year olds then I for one would be critical of that scout's character and would be in favour of letting him go. I don't see the issue here.

In terms of character issues, work ethic, compete level, desire to win, relationship with teammates and coaches, off ice conduct often get lumped into this category. Simple lack of maturity in terms of on ice game is not typically seen as a character issue unless it involves the player's reactions and body language. But the yardstick is the age of the player.

Let's compare the players shall we?

Merkley. Did the scouting reports question his compete level and criticize him for giving up on plays? Were Merkley's off-ice issues well-documented prior to the draft? Bob McKenzie (who is saying this having talked to NHL scouts) called him an extremely immature player and said his issues were in the rink such as with his teammates and coaches. Mark Edwards says he's coached with Merkley's first year minor midget coach so he knows him well and expressed his opinion. The headline when the Sharks drafted him was "Sharks draft controversial defenseman." I think you would agree that there are enough corroborative reports here and the way his junior team ended up trading him kind of confirms those reports.

Mantha. The "character issues" that I am aware of involve scouts questioning his work ethic, compete level, desire to win etc. Scouts don't like players his size not using his size. Don't remember anything about him having issues with his teammates, coaches etc. If there's more to his "character issues" do let me know. I seriously don't remember.

Luke. As one of the youngest players in the drafts, I read concerns about the mistakes he makes and the perception that his hockey IQ isn't as good as Quinn's. I didn't read much concerns about his injury. Didn't read anything about his character, work ethic, and on and off ice behaviour being an issue. @MS, you're usually very informed. Can you link me to articles where Luke's character was questioned?

 

[Vector]

I cannot believe I saw comments here asking "Well what was she doing in the time after she got fired from the Devils" well sorry that she has a slight gap in her resume when she didn't have the connections to score a mean-nothing scouting/consultant role from the OBC, guess we should dock marks off the 22-year old there.

It's also explained in the Athletic article that she had gone straight from school to working for the Devils, had start suffering form mental health issues while being far away from her family for the first time, and decided to take a step back. Teams were immediately offering her positions and she chose to back away for a bit and reassess her life.

 

[Melvin]

It's also explained in the Athletic article that she had gone straight from school to working for the Devils, had start suffering form mental health issues while being far away from her family for the first time, and decided to take a step back. Teams were immediately offering her positions and she chose to back away for a bit and reassess her life.

Working for teams is not as glamorous as people think, below the executive level. She was probably making better money at BMO than she will with the Canucks.

 

[God]

Working for teams is not as glamorous as people think, below the executive level. She was probably making better money at BMO than she will with the Canucks.

Just like a CFL player! She's part of sports culture.

 

[Melvin]

Just like a CFL player! She's part of sports culture.

Yeah. I mean, people are scrutinizing this hire like it's a GM/AGM hiring or something. It's so bizarre. Why did she not go work for another team immediately after working for the Devils? I don't know, maybe she wanted to get paid market value, have weekends off, have good benefits ...

 

[Johnny Canucker]

You say this like we hired someone who is horribly under qualified for an entry-level department as an individual contributor on a team of analysts.

A man gets hired for this role and no one bats a ****ing eye and grants them all the benefit of the doubt in the world. A smart woman gets hired and it's "this is political correctness gone mad! this is affirmative action! let's deeply scrutinize everything they've ever said and not wait to see the work they do for our team!"

This is a shit post. Re read my post. You’re looking for a reason to be triggered. I never said any of your assumptions. Take your sensativity elsewhere.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

He said he wanted a diverse staff so that he could have different voices and perspectives in the room. He didn't say "I'm going to hire a woman".

Diverse staff from 100% male staff. So ….

 

[Diversification]

Working for teams is not as glamorous as people think, below the executive level. She was probably making better money at BMO than she will with the Canucks.

What are the prospects for promotion? Is there much in the way of upward movement, or is it kind of like a pyramid scheme with executive positions? Would Director of Analytics fall under the category of executive level?

 

[MS]

First off, injury concerns are different. It is a frequent concern that causes players to drop in their draft year. Perhaps I'm getting old and people are using military style language I am not familiar with. I never heard any scout say they did an injury recon and then talk about nobody having anything good to say about the player that isn't connected to him or have something to game. Sounds like nobody had something good to say about how he is recovering from his injury is my interpretation if someone said that to me.

I'm not saying that scouts don't have nasty things to say about players. But they do so anonymously and or in private conversations that are not meant to be broadcasted. But IF we know a particular scout on the Canucks has an affinity for using nasty language to describe 17 year olds then I for one would be critical of that scout's character and would be in favour of letting him go. I don't see the issue here.

In terms of character issues, work ethic, compete level, desire to win, relationship with teammates and coaches, off ice conduct often get lumped into this category. Simple lack of maturity in terms of on ice game is not typically seen as a character issue unless it involves the player's reactions and body language. But the yardstick is the age of the player.

Let's compare the players shall we?

Merkley. Did the scouting reports question his compete level and criticize him for giving up on plays? Were Merkley's off-ice issues well-documented prior to the draft? Bob McKenzie (who is saying this having talked to NHL scouts) called him an extremely immature player and said his issues were in the rink such as with his teammates and coaches. Mark Edwards says he's coached with Merkley's first year minor midget coach so he knows him well and expressed his opinion. The headline when the Sharks drafted him was "Sharks draft controversial defenseman." I think you would agree that there are enough corroborative reports here and the way his junior team ended up trading him kind of confirms those reports.

Mantha. The "character issues" that I am aware of involve scouts questioning his work ethic, compete level, desire to win etc. Scouts don't like players his size not using his size. Don't remember anything about him having issues with his teammates, coaches etc. If there's more to his "character issues" do let me know. I seriously don't remember.

Luke. As one of the youngest players in the drafts, I read concerns about the mistakes he makes and the perception that his hockey IQ isn't as good as Quinn's. I didn't read much concerns about his injury. Didn't read anything about his character, work ethic, and on and off ice behaviour being an issue. @MS, you're usually very informed. Can you link me to articles where Luke's character was questioned?

Scouting reports on Merkley pre-draft were both that he quit on plays and didn't get along with teammates and coaches. He was absolutely torn to shreds on multiple fronts, by a lot of people.

Mantha was just eviscerated for being a lazy hockey player and not his actual personality and interactions, yes.

Doerrie's comments on Hughes would have been run-of-the-mill stuff on Merkley. The only difference is that pretty much everyone was slagging Merkley and people weren't slagging Hughes in anywhere near the same way, which made her comments stand out.

 

[MS]

It's also explained in the Athletic article that she had gone straight from school to working for the Devils, had start suffering form mental health issues while being far away from her family for the first time, and decided to take a step back. Teams were immediately offering her positions and she chose to back away for a bit and reassess her life.

She also took on joining the media with zero experience and managed to turn herself into one of the sport's most talked about and in-demand insiders in like a year, which is pretty impressive.

 

[Melvin]

What are the prospects for promotion? Is there much in the way of upward movement, or is it kind of like a pyramid scheme with executive positions? Would Director of Analytics fall under the category of executive level?

It's borderline, and depends on the organization. It's when you're an AGM that you become a big f***ing deal. GM and AGM is still heavily OBC. I'm not aware of anyone going from Director of Analytics to AGM but I could be wrong about that. There are of course guys like Dubas and Chayka that just got the AGM gig right off the bat. I feel like there's still a line between the GM/AGM's who are traditional hockey types and everyone else.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Attitudes like yours are the problem. I'm happy with this hire, but there are a few question marks given her history.

It's quite striking how some people find the idea of women in the workplace so exciting they'll automatically disregard any criticism as being gender based. At least you had your little moment to demonstrate how progressive you are for the board.

Well... If it was another pair of balls added to the analytics department, it likely would get a reaction like: "Oh cool. We need more people there."

Now that is a woman, we really need to make sure she isn't there just for diversity!

 

[Melvin]

You say this like we hired someone who is horribly under qualified for an entry-level department as an individual contributor on a team of analysts.

A man gets hired for this role and no one bats a ****ing eye and grants them all the benefit of the doubt in the world. A smart woman gets hired and it's "this is political correctness gone mad! this is affirmative action! let's deeply scrutinize everything they've ever said and not wait to see the work they do for our team!"

I don't recall everyone bringing up everything Ryan Biech ever said and having multi-day arguments about it after he got hired into the same department. I don't even remember it being talked about at all, really, but maybe I missed it. Did it get a thread?

 

[Diversification]

It's borderline, and depends on the organization. It's when you're an AGM that you become a big f***ing deal. GM and AGM is still heavily OBC. I'm not aware of anyone going from Director of Analytics to AGM but I could be wrong about that. There are of course guys like Dubas and Chayka that just got the AGM gig right off the bat. I feel like there's still a line between the GM/AGM's who are traditional hockey types and everyone else.

Would Tulsky be an example?