News Article: Rachel Doerrie has left the Canucks

[God]

Diverse staff from 100% male staff. So ….

He specifically qualified it by pointing out that most front office people in hockey grew up playing hockey, and wanted people from different backgrounds. It doesn't mean it has to be a woman because women grow up playing hockey too. He could mean that he wanted someone with a background in analytics from a different sport. Diversity doesn't always mean not white and male, lol.

Look man, you’re looking for a reason to be triggered. Jim never said any of your assumptions. Take your sensativity elsewhere. /s

 

[Melvin]

Would Tulsky be an example?

Oh yeah, duh. I'm dumb. Tulsky's path is pretty rare, but hopefully won't be as rare in the future.

 

[F A N]

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.

You're failing to understand the difference.

My point is that the stuff about Merkley was corroborated. There's so much concerning stuff there that ya everybody can understand why he was torn to shreds on multiple fronts, by a lot of people. This wasn't some closely guarded secret that only one brilliant person's "character recon" could have discovered.

The stuff about Mantha is obviously much less of a deal. An inconsistent player seemingly relying on his natural gifts being labelled lazy by some scouts is par the course, especially for a big guy who doesn't always use his size. Bertuzzi was labelled a lazy player. It's a red flag, but easy to rationalize away based on his skills size package. Like you said, any "character issues" did not extend to his actual personality and interactions. There were no concerns there.

This is far different from Doerrie's comments on Hughes. There was NO ONE ELSE corroborating what she said. And she even declared matter of factly that essentially anyone who had something nice to say was related to him or had something to gain from it. Like he was this evil guy who nobody liked and those who says liked him are related to him or have something to gain from it. Like don't believe it if his say midget hockey coach has something nice to say about Luke's character.

 

[The Stig]

Marek said on 32 Thoughts that he knows her personally, said she has a good eye for the analytical game and that we "got a good one". So that's cool. I know nothing about her but so far I've heard praise.

 

[UrbanImpact]

Absoloutely love this hiring.

I was listening to one of her podcasts last night and she was talking about how skating is the easiest skill to teach to prospects. The thing she says is the hardest skill to teach and develop is processing the game and thinking 2 steps ahead.

she said something along the lines of " because you know what you get when you can skate like the wind but cant think for poop, you get a dummy player like Michael Mcleod and look how thats turning out"

Gurantee if she was working with the Canucks and had any sort of clout theres no way we end up with a Virtanen.

Excited to see the type of players her analytics will tell us to target!

 

[krutovsdonut]

You're failing to understand the difference.

My point is that the stuff about Merkley was corroborated. There's so much concerning stuff there that ya everybody can understand why he was torn to shreds on multiple fronts, by a lot of people. This wasn't some closely guarded secret that only one brilliant person's "character recon" could have discovered.

The stuff about Mantha is obviously much less of a deal. An inconsistent player seemingly relying on his natural gifts being labelled lazy by some scouts is par the course, especially for a big guy who doesn't always use his size. Bertuzzi was labelled a lazy player. It's a red flag, but easy to rationalize away based on his skills size package. Like you said, any "character issues" did not extend to his actual personality and interactions. There were no concerns there.

This is far different from Doerrie's comments on Hughes. There was NO ONE ELSE corroborating what she said. And she even declared matter of factly that essentially anyone who had something nice to say was related to him or had something to gain from it. Like he was this evil guy who nobody liked and those who says liked him are related to him or have something to gain from it. Like don't believe it if his say midget hockey coach has something nice to say about Luke's character.

i agree with you it was out of line for her to say that. if she was a professionaly journalist i would call it unprofessional, but she seems more like a student doing a little podcasting on the side when not doing ciau analytics on the side.

and aren't you doing the same as her and extrapolating too much about her character from poor judgment she showed trying to be a journalist as a 24 year old college kid without a lot of training or support?

to me this is the kind of gossip is perfectly ok to share with friends in a bar, but not to put on blast as a media person. so a judgment call error by her, rather some raging character flaw.

 

[Diversification]

Oh yeah, duh. I'm dumb. Tulsky's path is pretty rare, but hopefully won't be as rare in the future.

That might be the route Doerrie seeks to emulate. If so, she will need to learn how to be more political and discreet as she rises in the ranks. Time will tell...

 

[Vector]

 

[Red]

Very good hire and nice to get some different voices in this organization. She's smart. It doesn't mean that she won't make mistakes but she seems capable of adjusting.

The fact that there's still a few people in this thread screeching about diversity hires and accusing others of being triggered while they themselves are triggered by their misogyny being pointed out says a lot about how far behind a lot of our society still is on these issues.

 

[Melvin]

Very good hire and nice to get some different voices in this organization. She's smart. It doesn't mean that she won't make mistakes but she seems capable of adjusting.

The fact that there's still a few people in this thread screeching about diversity hires and accusing others of being triggered while they themselves are triggered by their misogyny being pointed out says a lot about how far behind a lot of our society still is on these issues.

i find it very funny that I’ve seen zero of these posts which implies that the people saying it at are the same group of people who think benning was a good GM. What a surprise.

 

[Vector]

Rutherford personally chose her and is very invested in growing the analytics department. Has spent a lot of time talking to people outside the organization. Staff may be doubled (probably around 8 people) in the next few months.

 

[MS]

You're failing to understand the difference.

My point is that the stuff about Merkley was corroborated. There's so much concerning stuff there that ya everybody can understand why he was torn to shreds on multiple fronts, by a lot of people. This wasn't some closely guarded secret that only one brilliant person's "character recon" could have discovered.

The stuff about Mantha is obviously much less of a deal. An inconsistent player seemingly relying on his natural gifts being labelled lazy by some scouts is par the course, especially for a big guy who doesn't always use his size. Bertuzzi was labelled a lazy player. It's a red flag, but easy to rationalize away based on his skills size package. Like you said, any "character issues" did not extend to his actual personality and interactions. There were no concerns there.

This is far different from Doerrie's comments on Hughes. There was NO ONE ELSE corroborating what she said. And she even declared matter of factly that essentially anyone who had something nice to say was related to him or had something to gain from it. Like he was this evil guy who nobody liked and those who says liked him are related to him or have something to gain from it. Like don't believe it if his say midget hockey coach has something nice to say about Luke's character.

I don't really care? Again, unlike you I don't think that Doerrie would just be making things up.

She is pretty clearly very connected and I have no doubt she was told the stuff that she reported.

If that's the case, then there is no difference from what she said to what was said about Merkley. She just had bigger balls to report unpopular news on a connected person rather than being someone piling on when everyone was dumping on a guy.

Like, if she has a scoop or good/interesting info is she not supposed to report it unless other people have first? How does that work?

__________

Canadian hockey media are tied very closely to the team/league/players and will only criticize people when it's 'safe' to do so. And it's no coincidence that the guys getting ripped at the draft are almost always Euros and French guys or guys who had an obvious outburst like Merkley that couldn't really be ignored.

If it was a 'good Canadian kid' missing the Patrik Stefan empty net a bunch of years ago, Ray Ferraro's reaction would have been totally different. What an unlucky bounce! You have to feel terrible for him!

I mean, hell. The Kyle Beach story was probably the biggest off-ice story in the NHL in the last decade and there was like 1 media guy pushing it hard.

It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that media would have been more reluctant to report character concerns on a very well connected player like Hughes whose dad is part of the OBN and whose brothers are already on a couple NHL teams.

I heard a few whispers pre-draft on Nolan Patrick's character pre-draft but nobody in the media said a thing about it in his case either. And again a guy from a prominent connected hockey family.

 

[Melvin]

Rutherford personally chose her and is very invested in growing the analytics department. Has spent a lot of time talking to people outside the organization. Staff may be doubled (probably around 8 people) in the next few months.

Very cool. Wow, I'm stunned that a PHO is personally hiring analysts. He is serious about it. God damn.

 

[Canucks LB]

Must read, Man what a great interview.

 

[Vector]

Very cool. Wow, I'm stunned that a PHO is personally hiring analysts. He is serious about it. God damn.

It certainly seems to answer a lot of the questions we have about how much Rutherford actually cares about analytics and if it's all lip service. In practice, it may be, but we can't argue that his second ever hire isn't exactly what he's publicly talked about wanting to bring in.

 

[F A N]

Like, if she has a scoop or good/interesting info is she not supposed to report it unless other people have first? How does that work?

How it usually works is that a comment like that that from a known person goes around and usually gets commented on if it's true. I believe that Pronman addressed it and essentially said it was fake news.

I heard a few whispers pre-draft on Nolan Patrick's character pre-draft but nobody in the media said a thing about it in his case either. And again a guy from a prominent connected hockey family.

Actually this was reported and so there's some corroboration.

 

[Nucker101]

Beefing up the analytics department is great news. Now hopefully he hires the right GM.

 

[MS]

How it usually works is that a comment like that that from a known person goes around and usually gets commented on if it's true. I believe that Pronman addressed it and essentially said it was fake news.

It was mostly met with a wall of silence.

There aren't a lot of reporters who do deep dives on prospects and you've got Pronman saying that it's 'overstated' which isn't the same as 'false'. And that's really about it.

Again, I have no doubts that some sources of Doerrie's really didn't like Hughes. Whether those sources were correct in their evaluation or whether they represented an overall balanced view of all sources is another question entirely. She may have just small-sample-sized a couple of the scouts in the league that liked Hughes the least.

We'll see if anything pops up as his career moves along.

Actually this was reported and so there's some corroboration.

There were a couple things written that his play was kinda lazy. I heard rumours of character concerns a lot deeper than that but the media didn't touch it. He was universally hyped as a good Canadian kid and a bluechip stud.

 

[m9]

Very good hire and nice to get some different voices in this organization. She's smart. It doesn't mean that she won't make mistakes but she seems capable of adjusting.

The fact that there's still a few people in this thread screeching about diversity hires and accusing others of being triggered while they themselves are triggered by their misogyny being pointed out says a lot about how far behind a lot of our society still is on these issues.

You and people who think like you are a major problem in society.

This thread has been overwhelmingly positive. Yet, you have decided that for those that aren't positive you know their true motivation and it is something more sinister than it probably is. You also tell on yourself when even though you yourself say "a few people" you have decided to extrapolate those people to be "a lot of our society".

 

[F A N]

It was mostly met with a wall of silence.

There aren't a lot of reporters who do deep dives on prospects and you've got Pronman saying that it's 'overstated' which isn't the same as 'false'. And that's really about it.

Again, I have no doubts that some sources of Doerrie's really didn't like Hughes. Whether those sources were correct in their evaluation or whether they represented an overall balanced view of all sources is another question entirely. She may have just small-sample-sized a couple of the scouts in the league that liked Hughes the least.

We'll see if anything pops up as his career moves along.

There were a couple things written that his play was kinda lazy. I heard rumours of character concerns a lot deeper than that but the media didn't touch it. He was universally hyped as a good Canadian kid and a bluechip stud.

There is a lot that doesn't get reported with prospects. But Doerrie knew what she was doing and she had nothing to back her up.

Words matter. The fact that she mentioned people who have something to gain suggests that she did hear people talk positively about Luke but dismissed it by accusing them of being self-interested.

Anyways, you do you. Think we have enough of this here.

 

[Melvin]

It certainly seems to answer a lot of the questions we have about how much Rutherford actually cares about analytics and if it's all lip service. In practice, it may be, but we can't argue that his second ever hire isn't exactly what he's publicly talked about wanting to bring in.

Agreed.

The only kinda negative so far is he is coming off as a bit of a micro-manager. Ideally you hire the GM, and the GM can fill these positions. Hiring the AGM first and even analysts(!) before the GM is on board strikes me as a tad unusual. It's going to be interesting to see the power dynamic between him and whomever he hires into the GM role.

 

[F A N]

You and people who think like you are a major problem in society.

This thread has been overwhelmingly positive. Yet, you have decided that for those that aren't positive you know their true motivation and it is something more sinister than it probably is. You also tell on yourself when even though you yourself say "a few people" you have decided to extrapolate those people to be "a lot of our society".

Agreed. Some people (and I'm not talking about anyone in particular) just can't accept any nuances. I can acknowledge that Evander Kane is a very good hockey player without liking him and wanting him on the team I cheer for. Praising him for his on ice performance does not equate to supporting his off ice behaviour. Having concerns over what Doerrie has said in podcasts does not mean I am critical of the decision to hire her for our analytics department. Heck, saying someone is the most qualified doesn't mean they are my first choice hire. I don't see why it has to be one way without further discussions like if you criticize a person for one thing then you're against that person for everything. That's just not true.

 

[F A N]

i agree with you it was out of line for her to say that. if she was a professionaly journalist i would call it unprofessional, but she seems more like a student doing a little podcasting on the side when not doing ciau analytics on the side.

and aren't you doing the same as her and extrapolating too much about her character from poor judgment she showed trying to be a journalist as a 24 year old college kid without a lot of training or support?

to me this is the kind of gossip is perfectly ok to share with friends in a bar, but not to put on blast as a media person. so a judgment call error by her, rather some raging character flaw.

Agreed with everything you said. And I think it's fine to have some concerns over someone's characters based on their public comments. Being concerned is not the same thing as declaring that that person has a character flaw. And earlier the comparison was made with Ferraro and I commented that Ferraro is older and has years of experience in front of a live microphone. A lot of people say stupid things that they regret saying, especially when they are young. I know I have. It's good to learn from it. I bet you that Quinn would be asked about her prior comments about Luke and Quinn will probably give a quick no comment or something to that effect.

So to be clear, like I said in my very first post, I'm fine with the hire if it's in the analytics department under Fox since this is her background.

 

[F A N]

Rutherford personally chose her and is very invested in growing the analytics department. Has spent a lot of time talking to people outside the organization. Staff may be doubled (probably around 8 people) in the next few months.

My understanding is that Francesco is a bit unhappy with Rutherford getting credit for hiring Doerrie himself, when Francesco was not given credit for hiring Rutherford himself. Rutherford's response was that he wouldn't have to hire Doerrie himself if he had a GM.

 

[BrentSopelsHair]

You didn't answer my question. Do you believe everything that Tucker Carlson says as well?

Dude what in the f*** are you talking about