News Article: Rachel Doerrie has left the Canucks

[bossram]

I just listened to the bit about Pettersson again. She went even further than that. She said there's a good chance that Pettersson doesn't play again for the Canucks in that podcast.

She said the Sedins were brought in - on top of the fact that they're obviously very smart and knowledgeable - to help mend those relationships.

22 minutes onwards ish

This was a rather obvious reason for the hires.

 

[Hit the post]

Work from home, duh

I still live with "mother".

 

[tradervik]

Drance has dumped a fresh article on the Athletic and one interesting tidbit is this quote about the analytics department:

“Aiden Fox has been working on adding to our analytics department,” Rutherford told The Athletic. “He’s been working on a plan here for a number of weeks now as to where we want to go. We’re really looking at doubling the size of the analytics department.”​

Sounds like there could be at least two more hires and Fox must have the inside track on being promoted to head up analytics.

 

[Gstank]

Also, I bet my left nut she does 1 or 2 interviews in the next 2 weeks and that's the last we hear from her. She's not TC Carling.

I dont think they will let her do interviews because she will be questioned about her past comments and it will become a bigger thing then it already is.

She is definitely not the type to sweet talk the media and will probably dig herself a bigger hole when questioned about her past comments

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

I don't know if this would fall under analytics or not, but something that needs vast improvement is knowing how much to pay players/free agents.

For example. I spent this evening comparing Florida's roster to our roster in pts per game divided by their cap hit in millions of dollars for each player. The only Florida player less than 0.1 p/m$gp was Hornqvist at 0.092. Right now we have Boeser at 0.098, Pettersson at 0.07, Myers at 0.043, Hamonic at 0.037, Poolman at 0.034, OEL at 0.027, and Dickinson at 0.052. Boeser and Pettersson are due more to struggles, but the others were all examples of inefficient contracts.

Obviously I would want to do this over a full season, and points aren't everything. I'd also want to do it other teams, to get a more exact grasp of what good value is for defencemen. But spending 30 minutes on Natural StatTrick, Cap Friendly, and Excel I was able to get a rough value on how much you can increase a player's cap and still get value. Carter Verhaege will still have great value when his extension kicks in next year. While Horvat is at 0.11 right now. He very well could not be worth his next contract. Imagine what professionals could do with more time.

 

[Gstank]

Will also add the only thing that Analytics should be used for is projecting production of established NHLers are trying to find "gems" because everything else isnt going to have the sample size that is needed when using analytics, even then its very hit or miss.

I dont see it being useful in amateur player development because there are too many variables with level of competition and other factors that arent quantitative

 

[overboard]

We are not going to find out what she actually does or the decisions that she will have had influenced. A lot of this talk about her qualifications probably won’t be there if she was a guy. I mean did we talk this much when gear or wall got promoted? We didn’t know shit about them and it was like uhh ok sure whatever. The Canucks with more competent leadership made a decision that she was good enough to be hired for this role. If the team does well and she gets promoted then we will know she’s good. If she gets fired in a bit and the team sucks then we might know that perhaps not.

Indeed. Totally fair points.

But it's worth noting we're all talking about Doerrie because a) it's a ground-breaking hire because of both her age and her gender and b) she had some spicy Canuck opinions in media.

Let's not kid ourselves - this thread exists because of reason a). I'm all for this kind of thing in hockey - it's long overdue.

But we *might* have a similar - albeit likely much smaller - thread if the hire was a 37 year old white guy that had b). Tweeting that our GM was pasting macaroni on coloured paper and then getting hired is pretty remarkable, no matter how you slice it.

 

[Gstank]

Don’t care about her past comments, as long as she’s good at her job and a professional then that’s all that matters. I think people are losing sight of how young she is, she’s in my age group and we all say stupid shit when sometimes we shouldn’t.

A) she went off for about 15 mins, it wasnt a one off comment it was her going on a rant and just making stuff up as she went along. That was also less then a year ago and with the other shade she was throwing that year it seems to be some type of personal feud with some people. Regardless it was not an isolated incidant and past behaviour is a good indicator of future behavior.

B)Not you specifically but everyone who has to mention that she is a women in their post really doesnt understand what equality is. Its treating everyone the same REGARDLESS of gender. The people who bring up her gender when trying to bash other posters are doing the exact opposite by pointing out the obvious fact that she is a women. Critism is genderless but, again some people seem to want to make it about gender. Just thought I'd point that out because some people do not to get what Feminism/Equality is.

 

[arttk]

Indeed. Totally fair points.

But it's worth noting we're all talking about Doerrie because a) it's a ground-breaking hire because of both her age and her gender and b) she had some spicy Canuck opinions in media.

Let's not kid ourselves - this thread exists because of reason a). I'm all for this kind of thing in hockey - it's long overdue.

But we *might* have a similar - albeit likely much smaller - thread if the hire was a 37 year old white guy that had b). Tweeting that our GM was pasting macaroni on coloured paper and then getting hired is pretty remarkable, no matter how you slice it.

I mean twitter is for trolling, what do people actually expect? It’s not like she is off base.

 

[Russian_fanatic]

Not to bog down this thread, but wow it's absolutely embarrassing that the Vancouver market gives that moron as much attention as he gets.

The dude is a typical moronic fan who sometimes moonlights on the radio as a village troll but somehow there are people who cite him as if he's psuedo-media? It's wild to me that the guy has basically captured the following that Andrew Walker was trying to cultivate lol - props to him for that, I guess.

Who is this Tej?

Are we talking about Tej Dhaliwal? If so LOL... That guy might be the biggest Benning homer around.

 

[Canucks LB]

Tej and Taj are two completely different people.
Taj can have some really stupid takes, But most of the time people can deal with him.
I don't know Tej well on twitter

 

[F A N]

Jesus, man.

Yes, Hughes may have had a saline bag and then denied it for whatever reason.

More likely something may have been mixed up in the information he received and it was a different player (Sutter?) who had to have an IV.

Information that passed through two or three sources may have gotten garbled.

But I'll guarantee you that Sekeres didn't just wake up and decide with no source or evidence to say that Hughes was on an IV and risk making himself look like a fool. Like, why the f*** would he do that? It makes absolutely zero sense to report something that specific about a specific player if you don't believe it to be true. He has nothing to gain, it's easily disproven, and it harms his career. It would be absolutely idiotic. And sociopathic.

And yes, it is absolutely f***ing insane to believe that it's more likely that a reporter just 'makes stuff up' than that they honestly presented bad information that they thought was correct.

Every time I expose your poor logic you appeal to Jesus. Appealing to Jesus doesn't help your bizarre faith in reporters/media personalities man. I'm guessing you believe everything that Tucker Carlson says as well? Because making stuff up doesn't happen you said.

Using your arguments, why the f*** would Hughes say he has no idea where that reporting came from and deny that he was given an IV? Everyone around him was talking about how scary Covid was and what they went through. Hughes talked about how his lungs were burning after playing. Why the f*** would Bieksa specifically criticize Sekeres' reporting as a false report? Bieksa is now part of the media and is putting HIS reputation on the line as well. Your constant defense of Sekeres is just laughable. Why don't you tell the truth about your relationship with Sekeres here? You can guarantee what Sekeres did?

It's hilarious that you're now backtracking and claiming that Sekeres may have mixed things up. So what is it? If Sekeres made a mistake, he should own up to it. But he didn't. He is the only person reporting on it when he said that there are reports. Where are the other reports except those who reported on what he said? And it has been disproven unless you're calling Hughes a liar.

The fact that Hughes came back strong AND strongly denied being on IV makes me believe him. Sekeres on the other hand? He made shit up. If he didn't, then he made a mistake that he stubbornly and stupidly refused to retract or correct. Given how open the Canucks players were about their struggles with COVID, I think it takes a very gullible person to defend Sekeres over believing Hughes.

 

[duplo]

Every time I expose your poor logic you appeal to Jesus. Appealing to Jesus doesn't help your bizarre faith in reporters/media personalities man. I'm guessing you believe everything that Tucker Carlson says as well? Because making stuff up doesn't happen you said.

Using your arguments, why the f*** would Hughes say he has no idea where that reporting came from and deny that he was given an IV? Everyone around him was talking about how scary Covid was and what they went through. Hughes talked about how his lungs were burning after playing. Why the f*** would Bieksa specifically criticize Sekeres' reporting as a false report? Bieksa is now part of the media and is putting HIS reputation on the line as well. Your constant defense of Sekeres is just laughable. Why don't you tell the truth about your relationship with Sekeres here? You can guarantee what Sekeres did?

It's hilarious that you're now backtracking and claiming that Sekeres may have mixed things up. So what is it? If Sekeres made a mistake, he should own up to it. But he didn't. He is the only person reporting on it when he said that there are reports. Where are the other reports except those who reported on what he said? And it has been disproven unless you're calling Hughes a liar.

The fact that Hughes came back strong AND strongly denied being on IV makes me believe him. Sekeres on the other hand? He made shit up. If he didn't, then he made a mistake that he stubbornly and stupidly refused to retract or correct. Given how open the Canucks players were about their struggles with COVID, I think it takes a very gullible person to defend Sekeres over believing Hughes.

touch grass, bro

 

[F A N]

We are not going to find out what she actually does or the decisions that she will have had influenced. A lot of this talk about her qualifications probably won’t be there if she was a guy. I mean did we talk this much when gear or wall got promoted? We didn’t know shit about them and it was like uhh ok sure whatever. The Canucks with more competent leadership made a decision that she was good enough to be hired for this role. If the team does well and she gets promoted then we will know she’s good. If she gets fired in a bit and the team sucks then we might know that perhaps not.

For me, I think she's qualified. Resume wise, she's more qualified than Biech was. Biech's video work was just more available for all of us to see. Personally, I don't even think a "female perspective" is relevant here. Analytics and numbers should be analytics and numbers.

Personally, I don't think expressing concerns over her past comments is somehow misogynistic. With Biech, we know that he's a Canucks fan so whatever he said about management in the past, he took the job and scrubbed his twitter account. With Doerrie, two of her most controversial comments relates to Petey and Hughes' brother. That shines a spotlight on the veracity of her comments.

 

[im gangster]

No

 

[im gangster]

For me, I think she's qualified. Resume wise, she's more qualified than Biech was. Biech's video work was just more available for all of us to see. Personally, I don't even think a "female perspective" is relevant here. Analytics and numbers should be analytics and numbers.

Personally, I don't think expressing concerns over her past comments is somehow misogynistic. With Biech, we know that he's a Canucks fan so whatever he said about management in the past, he took the job and scrubbed his twitter account. With Doerrie, two of her most controversial comments relates to Petey and Hughes' brother. That shines a spotlight on the veracity of her comments.

Have you really been doing this for the last eight hours?

 

[Breakers]

I do remember she HATES Luke Hughes, Quinn's brother

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Great point by @Jyrki21

It is a great point, and I don't mean offense but why would you use Twitter for intelligent discussion? 70% are idiots who don't understand what constitutes a good hockey team and the other 30% don't understand what constitutes good business.

 

[F A N]

Have you really been doing this for the last eight hours?

Huh? I don't know what you mean.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

With Biech, we know that he's a Canucks fan so whatever he said about management in the past, he took the job and scrubbed his twitter account. With Doerrie, two of her most controversial comments relates to Petey and Hughes' brother. That shines a spotlight on the veracity of her comments.

You think hatchets can never be buried, or?

 

[F A N]

You think hatchets can never be buried, or?

That's not what I'm saying at all. But from a personal level, it would be much easier for me to forgive someone who questioned my moves as a GM even if I still disagree with his or her takes than someone who questioned my character or my brother's character and I believe it to be false.

What Doerrie said about Luke is pretty bad. I don't expect Quinn to "bury the hatchet."

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

What Doerrie said about Luke is pretty bad. I don't expect Quinn to "bury the hatchet."

She kept what she said very vague and tame. Not all conflict is resolved by scorching the earth. I'm the oldest brother in my family, and someone said that about them, I'd tell them "Go prove them wrong and make them look like an idiot." My brothers don't need their hands held and their business fought by me, but I'll support them.

 

[God]

Every time I expose your poor logic you appeal to Jesus. Appealing to Jesus doesn't help your bizarre faith in reporters/media personalities man. I'm guessing you believe everything that Tucker Carlson says as well? Because making stuff up doesn't happen you said.

Using your arguments, why the f*** would Hughes say he has no idea where that reporting came from and deny that he was given an IV? Everyone around him was talking about how scary Covid was and what they went through. Hughes talked about how his lungs were burning after playing. Why the f*** would Bieksa specifically criticize Sekeres' reporting as a false report? Bieksa is now part of the media and is putting HIS reputation on the line as well. Your constant defense of Sekeres is just laughable. Why don't you tell the truth about your relationship with Sekeres here? You can guarantee what Sekeres did?

It's hilarious that you're now backtracking and claiming that Sekeres may have mixed things up. So what is it? If Sekeres made a mistake, he should own up to it. But he didn't. He is the only person reporting on it when he said that there are reports. Where are the other reports except those who reported on what he said? And it has been disproven unless you're calling Hughes a liar.

The fact that Hughes came back strong AND strongly denied being on IV makes me believe him. Sekeres on the other hand? He made shit up. If he didn't, then he made a mistake that he stubbornly and stupidly refused to retract or correct. Given how open the Canucks players were about their struggles with COVID, I think it takes a very gullible person to defend Sekeres over believing Hughes.

I am not sure why you typed all of this up but it is pretty clear to me that MS was simply saying that sources that the media draws upon can be mistaken too. It's up to the journalist to vet their sources, but different journalists have different standards for what gets reported and what doesn't.

After the incorrect IV drip+Hughes report (which can be tied to another player who was on an IV drip), and the report about a Miller/Horvat rift, I think Sekeres' reputation has rightly been put into question, which I don't think anybody in this thread would disagree with. I can't really see Sekeres making this up just to cause a fuss because it hurts him a lot more than anyone else.

Also are you Lee Powell on Twitter by any chance

 

[PuckMunchkin]

And why are you so sure that she was reporting what a source told her. Seems like you just drank the kool-aid and think everyone who is skeptical is wrong.

I mean, you could have just came out and said "I choose not to believe what she said." and save everyone the trouble of trying to counter that with any kind of logic.

 

[Peen]

Also are you Lee Powell on Twitter by any chance

fan deffo isn’t lee

fan isn’t quote replying everyone at 3am and saying he’s personally scarred