Dr. Frankenstein Speaks to Igor
Yesterday Darryl Katz had an interview with Bob Stauffer put up on the Edmonton Oilers website. Darryl Katz hasn't had a lot to say to fans of the Oilers since he purchased the team and has almost never addressed the hockey operations side of ownership in a public forum. Granted, Mr. Stauffer didn't exactly ask the tough questions - this platform interview came on Katz's terms - but it nonetheless seems to me that a detailed look at what he had to say is in order. Whether we like it or not, what he had to say today is where we're going.
After the jump I'm going to have Katz's transcribed comments and I'll bold the comments that I think are most significant and then offering a little bit of commentary.
The Assessment of the Edmonton Oilers:
"Clearly, without a doubt this has been an enormously tough year for the Oilers, for my personally, for our management for our coaches, and most of all for our fans. I have to say, from where we're sitting, we view our fans as having been incredibly loyal and supportive. We're entering a very important time for the organization's history and it's an opportunity for us now to kind of let you know where we are and where we're going. You know, Bob, that I've been an Oilers fan for a lot longer than I've been an owner of the team and I'm not at all happy with how the team has performed. It's no fun for anybody. Most of all, though, this experience has been no fun for our fans. I know it, our management knows it and our players know it. I think it's important to know that I'm extremely passionate about winning. Last place is somewhere I never thought we would be and it's completely unacceptable. We - myself personally and we as an organization - are in this for the long haul and over the long haul I really like what I see. We have a great young core with a tonne more talent coming along. I look at a team like Chicago and I see what happened with their young talent in a few short years and we as an organization are keenly aware of where we are and what our objectives are moving forward."
There are three things that I think were really emphasized here. Darryl Katz is a fan and as a fan he understands how we, as fans, feel. He appreciates us and cares about us. To be honest, that's probably one of the biggest reasons he gave the interview at all. A few weeks ago Bruce wrote a frustrated piece about the lack of communication coming from the organization. Don Waddell had just had a Thrashers' Town Hall Meeting with season ticket holders to address the direction of the franchise after the Ilya Kovalchuk trade. This is what Bruce had to say:
"What also isn't working, at least not for me, is the lack of communication between the team's builders and its fans. In this area the club could learn a lesson from Don Waddell of all people, by making an effort to reach out to its long-suffering supporters and address the state of the franchise."
I think this interview is largely to let the Bruce's of the world know that every part of the Oilers organization hears him ("I know it, our management knows it and our players know it") and that Darryl Katz, in particular, can relate to his concerns. Was it effective in doing that? I guess we'll need to ask Bruce. I can't imagine it hurt.
The second thing that Darryl Katz wanted to get across was that he cares a lot about winning. The fans of this city are used to the owner(s) of the team caring a whole lot more about money and having the NHL in Edmonton than about winning. Peter Pocklington didn't see Wayne Gretzky to the L.A. Kings because he wanted to win. Doug Weight didn't get traded to St. Louis so that the Oilers could win more games. These were financial decisions. With Katz trying to take tax dollars for Katzotopia he probably realizes that it could look like he really just cares about money. The message here is that what Katz is focused on, is winning. He's not trying to flip the team for an investment win. He's in it for the long haul and he wants to win.
The third theme is that fixing this team is going to take a long time. Bob Stauffer introduced the question by talking about the decade of bad in Detroit when Mike Ilitch took over. Katz talks about the team having a "young core," "the long haul," and compared this club to Chicago's team that was able to rise from the ashes in "a few short years." The Chicago comparison could have been fantastic if he made a self/Steve-deprecating remark about Chicago's need to overcome a really stupid contract given to Nikolai Khabibulin. I understand why he can't do that, but I think it would have made his "I understand how the fans feel" a lot more credible. At any rate, he's pleading for time to sort through the mess. It's looking like a rebuild and it will look even more like a rebuild as the interview continues.
How Important is Drafting and Development in Acquiring Elite Players:
"Well Bob, to me it's absolutely crucial. My understanding from Kevin and Steve is that we've had very successful drafts over the past few years. Clearly we'll be opportunistic if we have a chance to upgrade our talent but, there's no question, the draft and development are absolutely a focus under our ownership and the fact is that rebuilding takes time and in fact it's only possible to rebuild if you have a loyal fanbase who are prepared to stick with that strategy. Many teams in the league don't have the opportunity to rebuild and I think, as I said, it's only because of the fanbase, that we have the opportunity to take this step and that's exactly what we're going to do."
Some of the themes from the first section are picked up again in this answer and the path for the future is made explicit: rebuild. And a rebuild is not something to fear, it's an "opportunity." It's a good thing and it's not something every team can do. Sure, there may or may not be a payoff in the near future and yes there are other strategies out there but the rebuilding strategy is one that the Oilers can try because of the loyalty of their fans. The fans are their enablers.
A second thing I wanted to draw out is that Darryl Katz seems to trust the people he's got in place. Bob Stauffer described the "new" coach and the "new" general manager in his opening. Now we have Katz putting his trust in the draft assessment of Steve Tambellini and Kevin Lowe. Earlier this season Guy Flaming suggested the scouting staff might be on the hot seat. The sense I get here is that this isn't the case. One guy who might be though is Kevin Prender-about-to-be-gassed.
Can Steve Tambellini Do Anything he Wants to Improve the Roster:
"Yes. There's absolutely no question that Tamby has the complete green light to do whatever he thinks is necessary to rebuild the hockey club. Not withstanding all the injuries, what we have today is not working, that's clear. So, I expect, and we should all expect, to see some changes."
This little answer is somewhat comforting. It seems he's decided not to blame injuries for the team's failure. Thus, there will be some real changes to the roster. Hooray! I understood Tamby's "free reign" to extend exactly as far as it stays on point. You want to send Moreau to the minors? Sure, but explain to me how it helps our rebuilding process. The transactions need to fit into the plan. If they stick with this, it could actually work out.
Can the Oilers Learn from Other Small-Market Organizations:
(This is the last section before they start discussing Katzotopia and conclude with another "thank you" message to the fans, so it will be the last section that I transcribe.)
"There's no question. I think learning starts with understanding that last place is absolutely unacceptable to all of us. We need to do better at all levels of the organization and I'm confident we will. Drafting and development in a salary cap era has to be a huge part of any team's strategy and that's absolutely what we're focused on."
I didn't really like this answer. I thought the phrase "salary cap era" was used more to sound knowledgeable than it was to convey something meaningful and that's kind of annoying. There's really nothing in this answer that's taken from other organizations. Drafting and development are important? Yes, but it's not as though the only teams who feel that way are the ones playing in small markets. It came across as a bit of a nothing question to me. On the other hand, Katz stayed on message. Draft. Develop. Rebuild.
9 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think had they been more earnest in the immediate post-Pronger era, or at the very least in the immediate post-Smyth era — admitted that it was rebuild time and jettisoned the aging talent instead of re-upping it — that we wouldn’t have had this problem, and that we might indeed be in the position of, maybe not Chicago, but LA or Phoenix, who finally admitted that what they were doing wasn’t working and blew it up and started over. Of course, this was also in the late EIG era, when they suddenly switched from being cheap to being spendthrifts to try to ward off the Looming Drug Lord. I maintain that, whatever the faults of Lowe, he was probably getting some seriously mixed messages from upstairs, and that wasn’t helping anything.
He mentions that not every market can support a rebuild. I assume he’s referring not to markets on life support but markets like Toronto and Montreal where you’d get ripped to shreds for saying anything other than, “The parade will proceed along the usual route.” I wonder if he/EIG/Lowebellini thought Edmonton was one of those markets. I wonder if it’s true. I dunno, I’m just happy we at least appear to have a plan; it’s more than we’ve had for most of the last four years.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
I don’t know Doogie. I don’t think the fans would’ve taken kindly to making it to the Stanly Cup Finals and then being sold a rebuild. And there was really no reason for it anyway. Had they used Pronger’s money more wisely they probably could’ve made the playoffs and continued on as usual. I don’t blame them for not going rebuild at that point. They just made many more bad decisions than good ones over those next 12 months and beyond which resulted in the mess we have now.
I got the impression that the markets who don’t have the “opportunity” to rebuild are the markets on life-support, i.e. markets where the fans won’t support a team that doesn’t win games. I think if Brian Burke sold the “we’re rebuilding right” vision in Toronto, he probably wouldn’t have any problem selling tickets and if he took it on the chin in the papers for 3-4 years, it wouldn’t be a problem if they started to win consistently coming out of it. If he got a 5-year commitment from the owners ahead of time and sold them on that vision when he was hired, he’d have been just fine.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 12, 2010 2:39 PM MST up reply actions
Obviously, no one would’ve taken well to a rebuild right after the Finals, but certainly, after Smyth was dealt, the writing was on the wall and no one cared to admit it. Instead of making offer sheets and signing Souray and Khabibulin, I think the team would’ve been much better off admitting defeat and going full rebuild, instead of trying to have their cake and eat it too for the better part of three years. Didn’t a bunch of us even say that at the time?
Burke’s able to rebuild in Toronto now, but you saw before that Ferguson was unwilling or unable to do this. Maybe that’s Ferguson’s fault, or maybe it was Ferguson’s failings that showed MLSE that Burke’s way was the better one. As for Montreal, I think my prior statement holds true: the Canadiens haven’t had a proper rebuild since the 1940s, when rebuilding was a very different beast. Terrible hockey deals through the ‘90s have been patched over for the last ten years with various stopgaps with predictably mediocre results. It’s one thing if you’re a consistently good team like Detroit or New Jersey and can keep refreshing yourselves, but when you do the dumb shit Montreal did through the ‘90s, you can’t simply paper over it and hope for the best. And yet, no one’s had the guts to do that: they’d get eviscerated by media and fans alike. That’s what I thought of when I read that comment, and wondered if maybe the Oilers braintrust felt similarly about Edmonton.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Yeah, the rebuild after they made the final decision on Smyth makes sense. But then the EIG went into full saving face mode after Katz came out. They felt that they needed to make a statement in the summer. It was a mistake for the hockey team but I think it was Lowe following orders more than anything else. As for a rebuild in Toronto or Montreal, sure, they haven’t done it, but I really don’t know that it would be taken worse by fans there than it is in, say, Florida. It’s one thing to have the name “Mud” for a few years and have the fans still coming out. It’s quite another to have the fans pissed and not attending any of the games.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2010 4:31 PM MST up reply actions
So much for the Hemsky Years
rebuilding takes time
June 1 Trade 83 to Boston for Ryder & the Leaves’ pick
Right now trade 27 to Florida for Olesz & their first rounder
[or are Fla already waving the white towel?]
Yeah, Florida is waving the white towel (as well they should at this point). I can’t see them giving up their first round pick for two years of Penner. There’s a very good chance they end up selecting in the top five. Are you taking Olesz as a salary dump or do you actually want him at his price?
I’m also not convinced the Bruins are willing to move that Leafs selection – even for Hemsky – if the pick ends up being first or second overall. If it falls below that the chances go way up, but I imagine your desire to make that trade goes way down. If you’re willing to take on the risk that Toronto finishes higher by making that trade at the deadline you’ve probably got a better chance, especially if Hemsky could be ready for the playoffs this season.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 12, 2010 3:18 PM MST up reply actions
Blowing Off Steam
I’m just so, so, so, you know
Have been since last July 1.
My point was, if they’re rebuilding, then REBUILD.
I don’t think they have to do tear it all apart
But they must quit DICKING AROUND
Great recap Scott. There was something really bizarre about this interview – it was Marie Antoinetteish.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Thanks Derek.
I think the bizarre thing was that it wasn’t really an interview, more of a scripted dialogue. I took out all of the Bob Stauffer narrative (didn’t want to transcribe it all) but it was pretty interesting to see how the dialogue was structured. They wouldn’t have been softball questions if they were spontaneous but because Bob was “playing a character” it didn’t come off as authentic. It doesn’t bother me that they chose to do it this way (as opposed to “A Letter From Darryl Katz” or a speech from the owner) but it wasn’t a “normal” interview, and that’s for sure. Nonetheless, I appreciated getting some insight into “the plan” going forward. If they’ve decided to rebuild then that’s not all bad – it’s much better than no plan – but I hope it doesn’t become an excuse for long-term failure.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 12, 2010 11:12 PM MST up reply actions

by 































