Follow me on twitter Follow @GunnerStaal
It's as been almost 20 hours since the announcement of Jim Rutherford as the Penguins replacement for Ray Shero. Yesterday, I had some instant reactionary thoughts while today I have had some more time to think about the hiring.
First things first, this isn't the worst case scenario. The worst case scenario would have involved hiring a retread like Rutherford and also losing Jason Botterill to another franchise OR hiring Pierre McGuire. This did not happen.
Jim Rutherford said some good things in his press conference yesterday and touched on a number of topics that had been ailing the Penguins lately.
The coach is going to have to adjust to the style of players that we have. Because with the talent level of the Penguins, the Penguins can play whatever way you want. But certainly with the teams that we ultimately have to compete with, we’re going to have to have a coach who can make the proper adjustments during a game or a certain period of time in the regular season or during a playoff series. Obviously the Penguins can score and can score in bunches, but based on looking at the Penguins from a distance, because that’s where I was, I don’t think that they could make the proper adjustments against certain teams. So that’s going to be a key factor when I’m looking at a head coach.
This wasn't exactly sugar coated, it is a direct shot in the direction of Dan Bylsma and a common complaint from many about Bylsma's coaching style, lack of adjustments.
The decision to fire Bylsma had already been made before the Rutherford hire
I took the information from the people who were here. I didn’t have several meetings with Dan to get to know him and evaluate him or take his side of the story. The answer to your question is I took the information over the last week with the couple of meetings that I had, and we agreed that making a change was the right thing to do
I know some people are going to have a huge issue with the Penguins delaying their firing of Bylsma but I don't have a problem with it. Dan Bylsma was still under contract with the Penguins, he was getting paid. They didn't prevent him from providing for his family, they prevented him from getting a job with one of their biggest rivals. Some people might say "Well if you fired him you obviously don't think he is a good coach" and I do not agree with that premise at all. Coaches have a shelf life and Bylsma reached his. He is going to have success in the future, the Penguins didn't want that success shoved in their face. Business is business.
One of the bigger sound bites from the press conference was Rutherford's answer to the ever popular analytics question
I’m also going to bring analytics into the organization. I don’t think we’re up to speed here on the use of analytics and this is something that I’ve gotten used to over the last few years. The analytics, if used properly, are great to really check everybody’s opinion. I am not going to make my final opinion like they do in baseball just based on analytics. I’m going to make a gut decision when it comes down to calling players up or making player trades, but I do think that this is something that we have to get up to speed on and I am going to add somebody into the organization in the next few weeks to put this together for us.The analytics are very interesting. If you do it properly — it’s not like baseball; baseball is an individual sport, and you can either hit the ball or you can’t or you can pitch the ball a certain way or you can’t. In hockey, it’s a team sport. When you’re using those analytics, there are things that analytics are going to point out to you that your hockey people don’t see. So I take those points, whether it’s good or bad with a player, then I go back and start questioning the hockey people. Are we not seeing this? The analytics aren’t always right, and we’re not always right. It’s a great sounding board, really. Being a guy who has been around as long as I have, some people are probably surprised that I use analytics. But I’ve used them for a few years now, and I can tell you that they really do make a difference.
I'm glad he mentioned them, I'm glad he put value in them. Put yourself in the position of being an NHL GM, you are responsible for knowing the ins and outs of all the players in the NHL to better help put your own team over the top. There are only so many hours in the day, you can't watch every single game and every single player. Analytics can help you find the needle in the haystack, except with a metal detector instead of by hand.
However, the thing with analytics is that the numbers are only as good as the person evaluating them. Just because somebody uses analytics does not mean that they are good at it. You have to understand how they work. You can't just say "Well this guy has a better Corsi than this guy, sign/trade for him!" That's not how it works. There are many variables and many metrics to be used, they have to be used in concert with one another. There are plenty of people that have written extensive statistical pieces on the internet over the past few years that could potentially be a great resource to any team in the NHL.
The Penguins would be wise to find one of them and hire them. The first team to give a job to somebody like Timo Seppa, Matthew Coller, Rob Vollman, Eric Tulsky, James Mirtle, or Tyler Dellow are going to have a leg up on the competition. Teams should be looking to hire an army of Corey Sznajder's to chart zone entries and zone exits. There is no salary cap on an analytics department, hire the best of the best to help assist in assembling the best on ice product. It will be money well spent, hell you'll probably save a ton of money on the cap by doing so.
One of the more important areas they will need to apply those analytics will be on the Penguins bottom 6. They only have so much cap space to solve such a glaring problem, a problem that Rutherford addressed yesterday:
One of the key things in my opinion to winning the Stanley Cup is you have to be really strong down the middle. We have a really good head start at that. OK? Do you play in a series that you roll four lines? It depends how many injuries you have. It depends what team you’re playing. It depends how good their fourth line is. I will say I think our supporting cast has to be improved. I look at our fourth-line players and some of those guys are double-digit minuses. You can’t have that. You have to have energy on your fourth line. You have to have penalty killers. And you certainly have guys who are capable of playing defensively and not costing you that much on goals against. Like I said, the key is down the middle. We have a great start.
He's not wrong, although I'm always skeptical of anybody still using plus minus as a barometer. However, it does seem like those comments will be putting Craig Adams on notice, this will potentially be the 2nd time Rutherford has sent him packing.
Rutherford discussed Kris Letang
"I know his name gets thrown out there, people like to start rumors, but this is an extremely good player," he said. "I don't have any urgency [to deal him]."
Buying high selling low not an attractive option, I can't blame him here. I'm not as bullish with his comment on Rob Scuderi
"I know he didn't play as well here last year, but you can't always go, based on one year," he said. "Sometimes, it's one year off, and then they're back on track. He's a key factor in this."
Or Marc Andre Fleury
"I think he's a very good goalie," he said. "He's coming off probably his best and most consistent year over the last four years, which to me is a very good sign that he's not tracking the other way, year after year."
This is the same guy who has hung onto to the overpriced and under performing Cam Ward for many years.
I'm hoping his analytics hire can help him save the 8.375M the Penguins would potentially spend on those two players and put it to much better use.
About a month ago the theme coming from Mario Lemieux was about grit and character, Rutherford touched on that subject:
Well, I see the top six guys are very talented players. But from a character point of view or a leadership point of view, I really don’t know until I get through training camp and get into the season a month or so and get up to Thanksgiving. Give it a little time. Looking at it from the outside, I suspect that we have good character in that room, but it’s quiet. It’s a quiet approach where you don’t have one or two guys who can stand up in the room and say, ‘This is what’s really going on.’ From a character point of view, I don’t think there’s an issue. But to have someone who’s a little more vocal, or a couple of guys, I suspect that’s probably needed.
I am 100% OK with finding players who are more vocal and fit the mold of that kind of leadership, but they damn well better be able to play hockey at an acceptable level. Nothing in sports is more lame than the rah rah guy who can't cash the check his butt is signing.
Ultimately I can't say that Rutherford said the wrong things in his press conference yesterday but I'm still left wondering why he is the guy at all
I feel that we have two or three guys here that are very close to becoming general managers. What I will do is give them big roles and a lot to say, and a lot of input in my final decisions. But at the same time, I know that I'm mentoring them. Nobody knows what's going to happen, but I would suppose that this term for me is probably two or three years here and it's going to be up to the ownership as to who replaces me. But certainly I will get to know these guys better and I will recommend what goes on in the future. Especially Jason (Botterill). He's been here for a long time; he's a very bright guy. He knows the game. I know that he's getting very close.
Jason Botterill has been in the front office of the Pittsburgh Penguins for the past 7 years, I don't believe it is necessary to groom him any longer. I feel strongly that Botterill is ready for the big chair now and that hiring Rutherford is a very needless step. Although, if Rutherford gives Botterill as big of a role that he is implying then it might as well be Botterill's job already. On the surface it appears that Botterill will be the one calling mostly all the shots while Rutherford will be the mouth piece for those decisions. Things will probably work out for the Penguins if that arrangement is true. It is pretty clear that Botterill was one of the voices in the previous administration that wasn't completely on board with how things were being run.
Both he and director of player personnel Dan MacKinnon are considered two of the more progressive thinkers around the league, statistically speaking, and that’s something president David Morehouse wants emphasized more than it had been.There’s a belief in the organization that it lost an edge on that front in recent years to other top teams such as the Chicago Blackhawks, St. Louis Blues and Los Angeles Kings, and that that has been part of what prevented the Penguins from building better depth around Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin.
So rather than a total house-cleaning of the front office, what it really is is a retooling – one that rewarded those willing to get behind that line of thinking.
And Botterill is at the front of that line.
My biggest fear of not naming Jason Botterill the GM of the Penguins was losing Jason Botterill, the Penguins have avoided that and they will be better for it.
First task for this new administration will be finding a head coach, Rutherford stated that they would like to have one in place by July 1.
The Penguins are not far away from being legit contenders again, they now have a bright young hockey mind in a position to be difference maker in Botterill. Time to ditch the old school thought process and embrace the new. It will be interesting to watch it all unfold.
Poll results from yesterday:
Thanks for reading!
Follow me on twitter Follow @GunnerStaal