Quick links:  Login  |  Sign up  |  Site Rules  |  Support TMLfans

Coaching and management changes around the league

Started by herman, April 08, 2019, 11:00:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

CarltonTheBear

#690
Quote from: Bullfrog on September 13, 2023, 09:21:22 PMI'm with you on the last part, but the rest is a bit weird. I wouldn't call it solid. What if a player doesn't want to share his personal photos? Now he's in the awkward position of feeling pressured to do so because it's the coach.

It'd be pretty strange if an office manager requested to see photos of their employees.

Well this isn't exactly a typical office manager/employee relationship. Coaches are often lauded I feel like for trying to get to know their players on a more personal level. I mean I think both Dubas and Keefe have been praised for that exact sort of thing. I don't think anybody would have batted an eye if Keefe asked Tyler Bertuzzi about what he did over the summer in their first meeting and then asked a picture of a cool waterfall or something Bertuzzi saw.

I also just don't really get the "what if they don't want to show photos" thing. I don't have kids, I don't have a fiancee I'm about to marry, I haven't been to a cool tropical vacation, but I do have cats and if someone I was trying to get to know asked me for photos of my cat I'm showing that person photos of my cat no problem. It doesn't really feel like that intrusive of a question.

At worst Babcock's "people skills" are awful and his attempts to get to know people feel significantly more forced than people with actual charisma like Dubas or even Treliving so his attempts to get to know others come across too strong. Even then though the Biz crew's spin on this whole thing is still absurd.

Bullfrog

Quote from: CarltonTheBear on September 13, 2023, 09:41:25 PMWell this isn't exactly a typical office manager/employee relationship. Coaches are often lauded I feel like for trying to get to know their players on a more personal level. I mean I think both Dubas and Keefe have been praised for that exact sort of thing. I don't think anybody would have batted an eye if Keefe asked Tyler Bertuzzi about what he did over the summer in their first meeting and then asked a picture of a cool waterfall or something Bertuzzi saw.

That's true, but I don't know if it necessarily works in favor of your argument. The coach has a direct impact on the player's career, even as simple as how much ice time they get. A coach (as seen in numerous lawsuits, criminal cases, etc.) wields power and influence over a player. Yes, these are professionals, but still fairly young humans and they will absolutely feel pressure to comply. Nonetheless, I agree this isn't on the magnitude of other stuff he's done. Praised for getting to know your players on a human level is great; but if Keefe asked to see the players' pictures (and even display them on screen, if this is true) would be equally weird.

Quote from: CarltonTheBear on September 13, 2023, 09:41:25 PMI also just don't really get the "what if they don't want to show photos" thing. I don't have kids, I don't have a fiancee I'm about to marry, I haven't been to a cool tropical vacation, but I do have cats and if someone I was trying to get to know asked me for photos of my cat I'm showing that person photos of my cat no problem. It doesn't really feel like that intrusive of a question.

You've answered your own question here. Directly asking to see a picture of someone's kids or wife (or <gasp> boyfriend) isn't as "normal" as it once was. But I suppose it really depends on how it's asked. I don't do this, but some of my friends blur out their children in any picture they share. That is to say: some people value privacy more than others. I don't so much, but it would be awkward to say, "sure, just look away as I scroll past the nudes."

Quote from: CarltonTheBear on September 13, 2023, 09:41:25 PMAt worst Babcock's "people skills" are awful and his attempts to get to know people feel significantly more forced than people with actual charisma like Dubas or even Treliving so his attempts to get to know others come across too strong. Even then though the Biz crew's spin on this whole thing is still absurd.

Definitely agree with this last statement. Ultimately, I think it's a non-issue, but it is an illustration of Babcock's lack in the subtlety department.

Dappleganger

I work remotely. I go into the office every now and then. I literally had my boss ask to see pictures of the kids. Obviously this was off my phone. I whipped out the phone and found a few good pictures. This was not awkward or untoward at all. I definitely enjoyed that she was taking an interest in who I was as a person.

Now, if I was a more let's say "adventurous" person and my life was full of debauchery, I'd probably be more hesitant to whip out my phone and start scrolling my album for some good photos to share.   

Significantly Insignificant

I think the problem is that there isn't enough information to actually form an opinion, which leaves many of us filling in the gaps with our own assumptions, which is really bad reporting.  It's reporting for the sake of controversy, and they are wrapping it in the guise of trying to do right by the players.

Any leader worth their salt knows that they have to understand the people they are leading so that they can create roles for them that they will feel invested in and ultimately perform well at.  So Babcock trying to get to know his players is not all that strange.  It's how that personal connection is being fostered that matters.  You can't force a personal connection.  It needs to be grown.

So if Babcock invites the players into his office, they start chatting and then organically it leads to showing some pictures on the screen, then that's fine.  There is nothing wrong with that.

Even if Babcock sends out an email ahead of time to the team and says something like "Hey I'm new here, I want to get to know you guys a little better, so during our 1 on 1 meeting, I would like for you to show me some pictures from last summer around what you did" is a little more forced, but still okay because it isn't a surprise, everyone is on the same page for the reasoning, and there is time for the player to prepare. 

But if the player walks in to Babcock's office sits down and the first thing out of Babcock's mouth is "Get out your phone and show me what's on it", then even if the reasoning is that he is trying to get to know them, that is forced, and invasive, which counteracts the part of trying to get to know them.

So without knowing how the whole thing shook out, it's really hard to judge whether this is something that is bad or good.
"We can't change what's done, we can only move on." - Arthur Morgan

Dappleganger

Quote from: Significantly Insignificant on September 14, 2023, 08:49:51 AMI think the problem is that there isn't enough information to actually form an opinion, which leaves many of us filling in the gaps with our own assumptions, which is really bad reporting.  It's reporting for the sake of controversy, and they are wrapping it in the guise of trying to do right by the players.

Any leader worth their salt knows that they have to understand the people they are leading so that they can create roles for them that they will feel invested in and ultimately perform well at.  So Babcock trying to get to know his players is not all that strange.  It's how that personal connection is being fostered that matters.  You can't force a personal connection.  It needs to be grown.

So if Babcock invites the players into his office, they start chatting and then organically it leads to showing some pictures on the screen, then that's fine.  There is nothing wrong with that.

Even if Babcock sends out an email ahead of time to the team and says something like "Hey I'm new here, I want to get to know you guys a little better, so during our 1 on 1 meeting, I would like for you to show me some pictures from last summer around what you did" is a little more forced, but still okay because it isn't a surprise, everyone is on the same page for the reasoning, and there is time for the player to prepare. 

But if the player walks in to Babcock's office sits down and the first thing out of Babcock's mouth is "Get out your phone and show me what's on it", then even if the reasoning is that he is trying to get to know them, that is forced, and invasive, which counteracts the part of trying to get to know them.

So without knowing how the whole thing shook out, it's really hard to judge whether this is something that is bad or good.

To that point, here's what we have to go on: At least two players from the Blue Jackets have come out and refuted what Spittin' Chiclets said on their pod. And I'll add this:



Jack Han who was on the Leafs coaching staff:

https://twitter.com/JhanHky/status/1701669871547765070


herman

I will add that Babcock is folksy and brusque and has interesting social quirks that appear to be social interaction procedures/routines (sort of the way a neurodivergent person sets up routines to avoid mishaps with misreading emotions or non-verbal cues) but that is very unqualified speculation. Babcock can very easily come across as self-serving and calculating, regardless of his intent. You can see it in Jack Han's anecdote; his first response was: what's the angle?

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/mike-babcock-perfectionist/
#27 #TeamFasstholes

herman

In any case:
https://twitter.com/KatieJStrang/status/1702362562593972327
Full on in-person investigation from the top execs of the NHLPA, including Babcock's former go-to player.
#27 #TeamFasstholes


CarltonTheBear

#698
I mean unless there's new/worse details I'm still not sure this seems worthy of this level of attention, but if players were uncomfortable with it they're obviously fully entitled to bring those concerns up the chain.

I'm also realizing that it probably says a lot about the NHLPA that these players seemed to think they were better off going to Paul Bissonnette than their union with these concerns.

Dappleganger

Quote from: CarltonTheBear on September 15, 2023, 08:02:51 AMI mean unless there's new/worse details I'm still not sure this seems worthy of this level of attention, but if players were uncomfortable with it they're obviously fully entitled to bring those concerns up the chain.

As long as Babcock didn't take the phones out of the player's possession I think this is a nothingburger. It's been established Babcock has done this activity in the past, with no one saying "he took my phone and starting going through it" and until that changes I think this is weird but not a gross violation of people's rights to privacy. We know people have a vendetta against Babcock and I also consider that in all this.
 

Zee

Quote from: CarltonTheBear on September 15, 2023, 08:02:51 AMI mean unless there's new/worse details I'm still not sure this seems worthy of this level of attention, but if players were uncomfortable with it they're obviously fully entitled to bring those concerns up the chain.

I'm also realizing that it probably says a lot about the NHLPA that these players seemed to think they were better off going to Paul Bissonnette than their union with these concerns.

It's not surprising at all given how the NHL and NHLPA handle things internally with no media attention, i.e. they love to sweep everything under the rug, nothing to see here.  As soon as it gets out in a media report than something might be done about it.

herman

#27 #TeamFasstholes

bustaheims

Quote from: herman on September 15, 2023, 08:42:50 AMDreger is usually just a mouthpiece for trial balloons, so this is quite the floater.

Oh, it's a floater, alright. Just needs a good flush.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Bullfrog

Quote from: bustaheims on September 15, 2023, 08:45:41 AM
Quote from: herman on September 15, 2023, 08:42:50 AMDreger is usually just a mouthpiece for trial balloons, so this is quite the floater.

Oh, it's a floater, alright. Just needs a good flush.

absolutely. I think it was a mistake by Babcock, but at most this is a conversation with his boss about sensibility.

But the comment about the younger ones feeling uncomfortable is what I was referring to earlier. Babcock is intimidating due to his personality, age, experience, etc. It's a position of power. He has to realize that younger players (who may or may not be comfortable with his ask) might feel coerced into doing something they don't want to do, even if it's innocuous.

cw

Quote from: Significantly Insignificant on September 14, 2023, 08:49:51 AMI think the problem is that there isn't enough information to actually form an opinion, which leaves many of us filling in the gaps with our own assumptions, which is really bad reporting.  It's reporting for the sake of controversy, and they are wrapping it in the guise of trying to do right by the players.

....

So without knowing how the whole thing shook out, it's really hard to judge whether this is something that is bad or good.

I'm with this. Need more facts before concluding anything.

They shouldn't smear someone in the media when the facts are not solid.

There was a discrete way of handling this.