News Article: Rachel Doerrie has left the Canucks

[wonton15]

Lol

 

[Gurglesons]

...while he was busy winning Stanley Cups..?

You can win Stanley Cups at all costs and still have a shitty ran organization.

See: Chicago Blackhawks.

And given the allegations, maybe Doerrie took the high road. Doubt it, because she and Mike on Staff and Graphs loved to spew drama, but who knows.

 

[rypper]

 

[Deeds26]

 

[Vector]

 

[rypper]

The more they try to ignore it and hide from it, the more attention it gets.

 

[canuckking1]

The plot thickens.

Tbh the drama off the ice has been better than the product off the ice for the past few years.

 

[wonton15]

So Dhaliwal knows exactly why but he teeters around it ‘out of respect’ for her. Leaving it a secret is almost making it worse and drawing even more attention to her.

 

[Hansen]

So both sides are lawyering up before releasing any public information is the vibe Im getting

 

[bandwagonesque]

The more they try to ignore it and hide from it, the more attention it gets.

Why is the organization obliged to immediately explain to the public why they fired someone? I can't actually think of an example of a team explaining the departure of a low-level employee a day or two after firing them. Calling this a "veil of secrecy" is absurdly hyperbolized.

 

[Hansen]

Good thing the new management doesnt have to worry about leaks, it seems theyre perfectly capable of creating a media firestorm all on their own

 

[rypper]

Why is the organization obliged to immediately explain to the public why they fired someone? I can't actually think of an example of a team explaining the departure of a low-level employee a day or two after firing them. Calling this a "veil of secrecy" is absurdly hyperbolized.

They wouldn't even admit the separation happened until Friedman and Marek spoke about it on the 32 thoughts podcast.

 

[Canucker]

Why is the organization obliged to immediately explain to the public why they fired someone? I can't actually think of an example of a team explaining the departure of a low-level employee a day or two after firing them. Calling this a "veil of secrecy" is absurdly hyperbolized.

They don't HAVE to do anything, but in a market like Vancouver's they will beat this story to death, until they get an answer, then they will beat the answer to death, find alternative answers, then beat them to death...until a new narrative appears to latch onto that they can beat to death.

 

[MS]

I guess this is kinda the fallout for hiring a high-profile person for quite a low-level position.

Most fans couldn't name a single other person in the analytics department and it wouldn't even be reported on if one of them had left.

 

[bandwagonesque]

They wouldn't even admit the separation happened until Friedman and Marek spoke about it on the 32 thoughts podcast.

Again -- is that even unusual? What discussion would a reporter expect to have with a team who just fired an well-known employee and did so clearly under some sort of duress?

 

[Peen]

I guess this is kinda the fallout for hiring a high-profile person for quite a low-level position.

Most fans couldn't name a single other person in the analytics department and it wouldn't even be reported on if one of them had left.

yes. i don’t think this is gender related whatsoever. it was extremely high profile. to the point where i feel like if they moved on from clancey or castonguay, it would garner less response somehow

it would have been reported on but would have gone within a day.

in theory, a position like this shouldn’t be drawing the same level of attention as judd brackett leaving.

rachel’s mother is hinting at something here on twit

 

[StickShift]

This thread

If the Canucks had reason or cause or a contractual right to terminate any non-NHLPA employee—I doubt you are going to hear anything publicly from them about it. They have zero obligation to disclose private information like that.

 

[Vector]

 

[BrentSopelsHair]

Yeah they definitely have no obligation to disclose shit to anyone, but it would be similar to if they had hired JD Burke into the scouting department or something and then subsequently parted ways in unclear circumstances. They made a buzzy hire (buzzy due to the individual's online presence) and then there is subsequently buzz when they part ways due to the person's persona online.

Veil of secrecy is a little rich from JPat but one would think that if this were a situation where she was moving to a different org or something there would have been a one-paragraph explanation prepared to provide inquiring media/fans. Nothing wrong with getting their ducks in a row before commenting but the comment will ahve to come at this point

 

[rypper]

Again -- is that even unusual? What discussion would a reporter expect to have with a team who just fired an well-known employee and did so clearly under some sort of duress?

The way they've handled it has only increased the focus on it.

This is someone a week ago the coach was raving about by name and then something happens and they go complete radio silence. The team has to know the market and how it would react. They've handled things terribly.

 

[Peen]

rick usually doesn’t speak in ways that are overly eloquent - like him and donnie have sounded like your classic boomers regarding jv18 the last two weeks - but he spoke well here

him categorically denying any FA influence on the firing.. but simmer saying it came from the top

this was a JR hire… also a JR fire?

 

[RutherPlan]

She could be fired for as simple reasons as being a bad fit or being toxic. If JR fired her (which would be his call) then there is likely good reasons.

 

[racerjoe]

Rutherford had these same issues in Carolina and Pittsburgh. Seems like a flaw of his.

I mean I don't see how Virtanen or Aquilini is on him, and at this moment I am leaning towards thinking the Doerie thing is also to do with Aquilini.

 

[CalderSchmalder]

I would really like to know what happened here, give us a reason why and then the speculation won't run rampant

 

[bandwagonesque]

The way they've handled it

Again -- what does this mean? How does it differ from the way literally any other team would handle it?