Mathias Brunet questions Gainey's competency

[bobby]

Gainey probably has as good a career winning % as any GM since Sam Pollock. Take a look at his record in Dallas.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Mathias Brunet is now irrelevant to me. Was it him who said Chippy's a junk prospect or something to that affect?

The reporters are getting on my nerves. Gainey had to (or wanted to) barrel through a hoard of them today.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Check out Rivet's remarks in The Gazette about Gainey.

That a seasoned NHL veteran, who's seen it all, has nothing but respect for Bob and faith in his decisions - even after having been coached by him for half a season - says way more than this clown.

[Punkned]

Yeah, Rivet's high respect for the GM who traded him out of Montreal after 12 years tells alot. I used to think of Brunet as one of the most credible hockey journalists in Montreal. He just took a huge drop in my esteem lately with his Gainey-Bashing and the less-than-solid story on Kovalev's "enriched" interview.

[Oleg Petrov]

That article is crap. Here's a list of some theses that the Montreal media assume are true, and that they shouldn't, because they're false and/or stupid notions:

1. GMs should interact with other GMs as participants at an auction, and not as businessmen seeking to establish solid working relationships with those GMs they feel they can trust.

2. GMs should disclose to the media all that goes on in their talks with other GMs about trades that do or don't happen, because future rapport with their fellow GMs will be in no way compromised by a complete and utter breach of confidentiality.

3. GMs should answer every question asked by reporters, and not deflect them with polite falsehoods (when the questions are asked politely, as in 2003) or with a blunt refusal to talk to them (when the media are in frenzy mode, as in the entire second half of 2006-07).

4. A GM's first responsibility is PR. If PR considerations require jeopardizing one's reputation and profile - for example, where a carefully cultivated poker-face style would be washed away by being a blathering panderer to the endless publicity demands of your team's city's media - so be it.

5. A GM owes the media a herculean debt, much less, say, anything whatsoever.

My vague feeling in 1994 was that the hiring of Houle and Tremblay was a triumph by the Montreal media. Tremblay was one of their own - sure, a former player, but become a media figure, and a character in the mold of the 110% commentator: a passionate, opinionated, hardworking, emotional, idiotic gasbag. Houle was - and is - a nice man, and not guilty of quite the same level of hardblowing as Tremblay, but he was their man too, and in retrospect, ######ed. You would have thought that the utter destruction of the franchise wreaked by these two gents would have served a lesson to the media that reporting and GMing involve different skill sets, and that they should stick to the one and leave the other to those with half a clue.

Matthias Brunet may not have been a reporter at the time, but even those who were seem to have fallen into the same groove.

It's like this guy has never even played Monopoly. If you keep offering to trade Baltic and Oriental every time you have the dice, people just stop listening to you. Respect takes a long time to build, and it's an intangible that you have to be extremely careful in preserving. Shopping Rivet to every GM in the Western Conference once he found out Wilson was interested would have cost Gainey down the road - it's as simple as that. So would telling some reporter what Jacques Martin wanted for Ed Belfour; so would telling some reporter, without disclosing what Jacques Martin asked, that the price for Belfour was too high. Talking to the media COSTS.

I think Gainey is a spectacular GM. There is no human being who could have his job who would make me more reassured. If he leaves, it's over.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

What really makes me sick is how critical and harsh the media has been to a man (he's a human being) who has had one bad year for sure. That's what really clinches my frustration. What happened to values?

There is NO CLASS IN THAT.

[Wamsley01]

That article is crap. Here's a list of some theses that the Montreal media assume are true, and that they shouldn't, because they're false and/or stupid notions:

1. GMs should interact with other GMs as participants at an auction, and not as businessmen seeking to establish solid working relationships with those GMs they feel they can trust.

2. GMs should disclose to the media all that goes on in their talks with other GMs about trades that do or don't happen, because future rapport with their fellow GMs will be in no way compromised by a complete and utter breach of confidentiality.

3. GMs should answer every question asked by reporters, and not deflect them with polite falsehoods (when the questions are asked politely, as in 2003) or with a blunt refusal to talk to them (when the media are in frenzy mode, as in the entire second half of 2006-07).

4. A GM's first responsibility is PR. If PR considerations require jeopardizing one's reputation and profile - for example, where a carefully cultivated poker-face style would be washed away by being a blathering panderer to the endless publicity demands of your team's city's media - so be it.

5. A GM owes the media a herculean debt, much less, say, anything whatsoever.

My vague feeling in 1994 was that the hiring of Houle and Tremblay was a triumph by the Montreal media. Tremblay was one of their own - sure, a former player, but become a media figure, and a character in the mold of the 110% commentator: a passionate, opinionated, hardworking, emotional, idiotic gasbag. Houle was - and is - a nice man, and not guilty of quite the same level of hardblowing as Tremblay, but he was their man too, and in retrospect, ######ed. You would have thought that the utter destruction of the franchise wreaked by these two gents would have served a lesson to the media that reporting and GMing involve different skill sets, and that they should stick to the one and leave the other to those with half a clue.

Matthias Brunet may not have been a reporter at the time, but even those who were seem to have fallen into the same groove.

It's like this guy has never even played Monopoly. If you keep offering to trade Baltic and Oriental every time you have the dice, people just stop listening to you. Respect takes a long time to build, and it's an intangible that you have to be extremely careful in preserving. Shopping Rivet to every GM in the Western Conference once he found out Wilson was interested would have cost Gainey down the road - it's as simple as that. So would telling some reporter what Jacques Martin wanted for Ed Belfour; so would telling some reporter, without disclosing what Jacques Martin asked, that the price for Belfour was too high. Talking to the media COSTS.

I think Gainey is a spectacular GM. There is no human being who could have his job who would make me more reassured. If he leaves, it's over.

BINGO! Great response. Anybody who is in a Fantasy league will not call the guy who offers Kyle Wellwood for Sydney Crosby. It is all about trust and cultivating relationships. Gainey would probably only deal with Burke if he overwhelmed him, why call a guy who pissed and moaned about GMs trying to rip him off. Do you think he was going to offer anything better? Burke was on one end trying to get shit for free and Martin was trying to get Alexander Steen for 2 months of Gary Roberts.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

BINGO! Great response. Anybody who is in a Fantasy league will not call the guy who offers Kyle Wellwood for Sydney Crosby. It is all about trust and cultivating relationships. Gainey would probably only deal with Burke if he overwhelmed him, why call a guy who pissed and moaned about GMs trying to rip him off. Do you think he was going to offer anything better? Burke was on one end trying to get shit for free and Martin was trying to get Alexander Steen for 2 months of Gary Roberts.

That's why I give Gainey the benefit of the doubt. Rumours had us after Stumpel.

Now, if you gauge the Buffalo deal with Washington it was a center for a center.

I'm not saying trades set a "trade market" like free agency does. But it wouldn't surprise me if Pleks (and maybe more) was the price for Stumpel = a center for a center.

One step forward, one step back. What's the good in that?

I am speculating but this is probably what Bob got on the phone all day - Similar junk.

[beliveau1]

That article is crap. Here's a list of some theses that the Montreal media assume are true, and that they shouldn't, because they're false and/or stupid notions:

1. GMs should interact with other GMs as participants at an auction, and not as businessmen seeking to establish solid working relationships with those GMs they feel they can trust.

2. GMs should disclose to the media all that goes on in their talks with other GMs about trades that do or don't happen, because future rapport with their fellow GMs will be in no way compromised by a complete and utter breach of confidentiality.

3. GMs should answer every question asked by reporters, and not deflect them with polite falsehoods (when the questions are asked politely, as in 2003) or with a blunt refusal to talk to them (when the media are in frenzy mode, as in the entire second half of 2006-07).

4. A GM's first responsibility is PR. If PR considerations require jeopardizing one's reputation and profile - for example, where a carefully cultivated poker-face style would be washed away by being a blathering panderer to the endless publicity demands of your team's city's media - so be it.

5. A GM owes the media a herculean debt, much less, say, anything whatsoever.

My vague feeling in 1994 was that the hiring of Houle and Tremblay was a triumph by the Montreal media. Tremblay was one of their own - sure, a former player, but become a media figure, and a character in the mold of the 110% commentator: a passionate, opinionated, hardworking, emotional, idiotic gasbag. Houle was - and is - a nice man, and not guilty of quite the same level of hardblowing as Tremblay, but he was their man too, and in retrospect, ######ed. You would have thought that the utter destruction of the franchise wreaked by these two gents would have served a lesson to the media that reporting and GMing involve different skill sets, and that they should stick to the one and leave the other to those with half a clue.

Matthias Brunet may not have been a reporter at the time, but even those who were seem to have fallen into the same groove.

It's like this guy has never even played Monopoly. If you keep offering to trade Baltic and Oriental every time you have the dice, people just stop listening to you. Respect takes a long time to build, and it's an intangible that you have to be extremely careful in preserving. Shopping Rivet to every GM in the Western Conference once he found out Wilson was interested would have cost Gainey down the road - it's as simple as that. So would telling some reporter what Jacques Martin wanted for Ed Belfour; so would telling some reporter, without disclosing what Jacques Martin asked, that the price for Belfour was too high. Talking to the media COSTS.

I think Gainey is a spectacular GM. There is no human being who could have his job who would make me more reassured. If he leaves, it's over.

Very well said - thanks for a well written synopsis of what managing in the NHL is, as well as what it means to operate with class and a professional demeanour. It is not the excrement and cheap fodder of the press to pass of as entertainment, let alone truth? This tripe is just going to make it so much harder for Gainey to sign free agents this summer.

Edited March 7, 2007 by beliveau1

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I agree and defend Gainey to the hilt. However, I notice that here in Vancouver the GM gives a weekly interview with the local sports station and fields questions from fans in the process. That, to me, is a very nice, classy thing for an organization to do. It wouldn't HURT for Gainey to do something like that and it might help to keep the dogs at bay.

Having said that, I don't think it's a required part of the job description - and indeed, it's probably a testament to the strength of Bob's position that he feels no need to do it. (In a weird way, that's reassuring: Boivin and Gilette are so committed to Gainey that he feels absolutely no pressure to do any PR on his own behalf - this speaks to a profound degree of institutional stability in Montreal).

[OneSharpMarble]

I agree and defend Gainey to the hilt. However, I notice that here in Vancouver the GM gives a weekly interview with the local sports station and fields questions from fans in the process. That, to me, is a very nice, classy thing for an organization to do. It wouldn't HURT for Gainey to do something like that and it might help to keep the dogs at bay.

Having said that, I don't think it's a required part of the job description - and indeed, it's probably a testament to the strength of Bob's position that he feels no need to do it. (In a weird way, that's reassuring: Boivin and Gilette are so committed to Gainey that he feels absolutely no pressure to do any PR on his own behalf - this speaks to a profound degree of institutional stability in Montreal).

Gainey enables the press to make up rumours by not informing the public about what is going on.

Team plays poorly -> Gainey shuts the doors -> Public gets curious and press satifies that curiousity with rumours -> Gainey doesn't deny rumours or set record straight

If Gainey kept everyone up to speed the press would not have the ability to create such elaborate problems.

[Mont Royale]

Gainey enables the press to make up rumours by not informing the public about what is going on.

Team plays poorly -> Gainey shuts the doors -> Public gets curious and press satifies that curiousity with rumours -> Gainey doesn't deny rumours or set record straight

If Gainey kept everyone up to speed the press would not have the ability to create such elaborate problems.

You think Gainey should deny rumours?

"Hey Bob, I hear you're trying to move Bonk, Rivet, or Souray before the deadline - any comment?"

"I am NOT trying to move Bonk or Souray."

Hmmm.

The only thing he can do is what he did in Nashville: say he had faith in the current lineup, they can and need to play better, etc. Possible trades get discussed all the time, but it's not good for the team to hear Gainey talking about some players' impending departure. The media wants this information - but so what?

[bobby]

In fairness to Gainey, satisfying the media is a considerably different task in Montreal than it is in Vancouver, or any other city in the NHL for that matter. If he set about to keep the press happy and informed in Montreal, it would be a full time job for him, and he would have no time left to do any of the normal General Manager duties.

[OneSharpMarble]

You think Gainey should deny rumours?

"Hey Bob, I hear you're trying to move Bonk, Rivet, or Souray before the deadline - any comment?"

"I am NOT trying to move Bonk or Souray."

Hmmm.

The only thing he can do is what he did in Nashville: say he had faith in the current lineup, they can and need to play better, etc. Possible trades get discussed all the time, but it's not good for the team to hear Gainey talking about some players' impending departure. The media wants this information - but so what?

What he says to the media and what he says to other GM's and the team can be two very different things.

[Strummerman]

Gainey probably has as good a career winning % as any GM since Sam Pollock. Take a look at his record in Dallas.

It's true he does have a great record from 92-2002. However he did have the likes of Modano Hull Belfour etc for most of this time. He did have a lot of money to burn too. Though the Stars did well, but don't compare him to Sam pollock and his 10 to 12 stanley cups