Peter Chiarelli fired; Claude and coaching staff stays
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
I don't get the mass disdain around the prospect of Sweeney taking over. As he's internal, I don't see this as a sea change in the way the organization operates on a high level.
Sweeney up top opens the door for guys in Providence to fill those bottom-6 roster spots cheaply, and should be a departure from Kelly/Smith-type contracts that put a squeeze on the top of the roster and result in guys like Boychuk being sacrificed.
The signing of character overagers like Hickman, Cave, and Czarnik tells me they are getting ready to make this method of breaking young players into the roster the organization's new norm. Not coincidentally, this revamping of the fourth line with additional speed and offensive prowess was arguably Chiarelli's biggest oversight this past season, as he did nothing of the sort and ended up sending down the only player (Ferlin) who showed he could contribute there.
Additionally, one of the reasons Providence hasn't been as much of a feeder to the Bruins until this season (when Sweeney was promoted to GM of Providence) is Bruce Cassidy. Much like Claude, Cassidy relies on his vets (relatively speaking - in reality, 24-25 year olds like Cherniwchan/Lindblad/Carey) to get the bulk of the ice time, particularly in close games. Cassidy and Chiarelli were tied at the hip, as there was every reason both in terms of Providence's performance and the player development therein to let Cassidy go earlier. Also, Cassidy is currently only on a one-year extension after this season - it would not surprise me at all to see a more developmentally-minded coach replace him as the B's for more NHL-ready depth forwards reaches critical mass.
For me, Sweeney gives the youth movement a chance, and mitigates the risk of falling in love with bottom 6ers. His trade and contract negotiation skills are obviously yet to be determined, but for me there's a lot to like here.
Sweeney's appointment would tell me the club recognized where Chiarelli fell short and, while they don't want to blow it up and start from scratch, they are addressing those shortcomings and want to keep the culture and style of play they've established.
As far as external candidates, no effin thank you to Ray Shero. He won 1 Cup while having Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin handed to him - and he did so while they were still on a combined ~$12m AAV. He'd be an upgrade as far as talent evaluation in trades goes, but overall, a thousand times: no.
Sweeney up top opens the door for guys in Providence to fill those bottom-6 roster spots cheaply, and should be a departure from Kelly/Smith-type contracts that put a squeeze on the top of the roster and result in guys like Boychuk being sacrificed.
The signing of character overagers like Hickman, Cave, and Czarnik tells me they are getting ready to make this method of breaking young players into the roster the organization's new norm. Not coincidentally, this revamping of the fourth line with additional speed and offensive prowess was arguably Chiarelli's biggest oversight this past season, as he did nothing of the sort and ended up sending down the only player (Ferlin) who showed he could contribute there.
Additionally, one of the reasons Providence hasn't been as much of a feeder to the Bruins until this season (when Sweeney was promoted to GM of Providence) is Bruce Cassidy. Much like Claude, Cassidy relies on his vets (relatively speaking - in reality, 24-25 year olds like Cherniwchan/Lindblad/Carey) to get the bulk of the ice time, particularly in close games. Cassidy and Chiarelli were tied at the hip, as there was every reason both in terms of Providence's performance and the player development therein to let Cassidy go earlier. Also, Cassidy is currently only on a one-year extension after this season - it would not surprise me at all to see a more developmentally-minded coach replace him as the B's for more NHL-ready depth forwards reaches critical mass.
For me, Sweeney gives the youth movement a chance, and mitigates the risk of falling in love with bottom 6ers. His trade and contract negotiation skills are obviously yet to be determined, but for me there's a lot to like here.
Sweeney's appointment would tell me the club recognized where Chiarelli fell short and, while they don't want to blow it up and start from scratch, they are addressing those shortcomings and want to keep the culture and style of play they've established.
As far as external candidates, no effin thank you to Ray Shero. He won 1 Cup while having Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin handed to him - and he did so while they were still on a combined ~$12m AAV. He'd be an upgrade as far as talent evaluation in trades goes, but overall, a thousand times: no.
PedroSpecialK said:
Great post. If they hire Sweeney they can find a cap guy to be his right hand man. I think he will be ok in trade negotiations.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
But is that believable? If you're a manager do you allow your staff to make franchise altering moves that you disagree with? I don't believe that.
Look, I'm blaming them for something that hasn't happened yet, but I worry that this isn't about bettering the franchise and more about appeasing the masses. I think hiring an insider makes that seem more likely and I hope they go outside of the organization if they really want a change.
The whole "gave out too many NMC's to marginal players" is way overplayed. Not all NMC's are the same. Most are modified that still give the team some ability to move the player. Typically, they'll have a full NMC for the 1st season or two and then be reduced to having the player submit a list of 6-8 teams they won't accept a trade to. I don't know of any case where they had something on the table and the player voided the deal. Maybe it's happened and been kept in house, but I doubt it.
Going into this year, 8 players had NMC's. Bergeron, Lucic, Marchand, Kelly, Krejci, Chara, Seidenberg and possibly Eriksson (if it wasn't voided during the trade). Chara is the only one who appears to have a full NMC with Bergeron's in force until the last 2 years of his deal. If there were deals to be had, they would find a way.
Going into this year, 8 players had NMC's. Bergeron, Lucic, Marchand, Kelly, Krejci, Chara, Seidenberg and possibly Eriksson (if it wasn't voided during the trade). Chara is the only one who appears to have a full NMC with Bergeron's in force until the last 2 years of his deal. If there were deals to be had, they would find a way.
You mean the organizational issues that brought us a Stanley Cup and 7 straight playoff appearances?burstnbloom said:
Neely came on board after Chiarelli, and there has at least been speculation that Chiarelli had final say on personnel.
If there really is a new organizational focus on moving younger players, Claude probably needs to go as well. I highly doubt that Chiarelli stuck him with guys like Campbell and Paille while he was demanding Spooner, Ferlin, etc.
If there really is a new organizational focus on moving younger players, Claude probably needs to go as well. I highly doubt that Chiarelli stuck him with guys like Campbell and Paille while he was demanding Spooner, Ferlin, etc.
burstnbloom said:
There's the rub though: does the FO/ownership (and fans) really want a massive change, or are tweaks on shortcomings within Chiarelli's performance - many of which were glaringly obvious to anybody paying attention - the best way to maintain what they've built and adapt to the changes league-wide? Considering the fact that they have kept everybody in the organization aside from Chiarelli, Paille, and Campbell thus far, I have to believe it's the latter.
For me, that raises another question as to why Neely signed off on a lot of these moves. Was it to give himself a basis for firing Chiarelli and getting 'his guy' into the GM's chair? Fucked up as that may be, it was clear they were not always best buddies.
One bad year out of 8 is not enough to justify a firing.
On the other hand, the Seguin deal alone is more than enough to justify it. Dealing an elite player for a less than elite return should be a firing offense.
On the other hand, the Seguin deal alone is more than enough to justify it. Dealing an elite player for a less than elite return should be a firing offense.
See, I thought he deserved the ax simply for that Behind the B episode where he was dismayed to lose out on Horton.Eddie Jurak said:
Can you imagine this roster if he'd actually signed him?
PedroSpecialK said:
PSK, your previous post definitely shined a new light on this for me. I am a fan of tweaking the shortcomings, which to me meant keep the status quo with some pretty clear change directives, but I think you're probably right. What I worry about is Sweeney not doing anything different, though as I said before, its not fair for me to blame him/them for something they haven't done.
Either way, I'm not passionate either way, but my initial reaction was this was an appeasement to the external dialogue and I want my front offices smarter than that. If they are thinking they way you are, then I don't really have a problem.
FL4WL3SS said:
Fl4W, don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for change or discounting Chia's accomplishments. I was speaking as if I believed management thought there were organizational issues. I would have let Chia keep his job.
What exactly would be the rationale behind promoting Sweeney? Is there any part of the position that he's particularly competent in? He has no experience negotiating trades or contracts, no experience dealing with a salary cap, and has been working in a player development program that isn't particularly effective. Why is that a person you want to put in charge of the organization?
I think it is a terrible decision, but not the least bit surprising, as I think Charlie boy wants a seat at the table and Chiarelli wouldn't go there.
I hate Shero, I think he is the most overrated dolt in the sport. No one has ever been handed a better position to work from, and he just did very little with it.
I assume it will be Sweeney; although, I guess there is a chance it is Gorton, as Gorton and Charlie supposedly were buddies when Gorton was here
I hate Shero, I think he is the most overrated dolt in the sport. No one has ever been handed a better position to work from, and he just did very little with it.
I assume it will be Sweeney; although, I guess there is a chance it is Gorton, as Gorton and Charlie supposedly were buddies when Gorton was here
I think you're misunderstanding some of the roles here.burstnbloom said:
Neely certainly did approve of Chiarelli attempting to work out a trade of Seguin. Once that was done, Neely was unlikely to veto a trade unless it was blatantly ridiculous or had significant budget impact. You want your GM empowered to make trades; otherwise, it becomes harder for your GM to make the trades you need. Word leaking out around the league that the Bruins GM is powerless to make decisions would not be a good thing.
I was in favor of keeping Chiarelli. But there's a lot that happens behind the scenes neither we nor the media see. I also don't think it's accurate to assume that promoting an insider means a roster full of Gregory Campbell's either.
I also think this move has a lot less to do with appeasing the masses than it does to appease Jacobs Jr. Ownership changes happen, and as much as we may disagree with the specifics, Charlie Jacobs certainly has the right to decide how he wants the team to be run, and who will be part of his management team.
By the way, I don;t believe this is news to Chiarelli today. He knew it was coming.
As I said a the time, I don't think Chiarelli was given an option on how to handle assets at the trade deadline. I think he had limited assets he was allowed to deal, and yet was also given a mandate to try and make the postseason and that selling wasn't an option
As I said a the time, I don't think Chiarelli was given an option on how to handle assets at the trade deadline. I think he had limited assets he was allowed to deal, and yet was also given a mandate to try and make the postseason and that selling wasn't an option
BigMike said:
Where do you get that he had limited assets to trade? I have not seen any source for that anywhere. Is that just your 'gut feeling'? Or do you have something more specific to add?
Additionally, where do you get the notion that Charlie wants a seat at the table? It's the first time I've heard anything relative to Charlie wanting to make any decision vis-a-vis players and player development.
I do not like this move but am not surprised. A lot of posters hit it right on the head in the sense this was a combination of Jacobs stating everyone was under review, do something to appease the masses, poor performance of the team, missing the playoffs, Seguin trade, and general salary cap debauchery. Does not merit firing the GM after the success this team has had, but combined, there is justification if one is looking for it.
Give Neely more power and get Sweeney in there to make sure it's executed appropriately. I am more than fine with that as a plan B.
Give Neely more power and get Sweeney in there to make sure it's executed appropriately. I am more than fine with that as a plan B.
I'd like to see a source on that. They were clear they didn't want to trade their first rounder, but I don't think there was anything said (at least publicly) about Chiarelli not having the authority to deal a first rounder.
TheRealness said:
Right. If anything, I get the sense that this move further insulates CJ from both blame and responsibility. The new GM will be Neely's Man (Sweeney). The coach will be Claude for a few more seasons, extending this window while tweaking around the edges. When Claude and Chara are done, Sweeney gets to hire His Man as the new coach, buying several more seasons of stability. If Sweeney fails five or six seasons from now, Neely can be "forced" in firing his friend and making "one last"GM/coach hire.
And never does CJ have either full accountability nor responsibility. It's really good Jacobs management theory. Pin the problems on the President, who happens to be a beloved figure until all his fans die off. Bravo to CJ if he pulls this off.
I'll first say that Cam Neely was one of my all-time favorite players regardless of sport. If I had a second son, I'd have named him Cam. I think he's been a good tone setter for the organization and definitely drives a winning attitude. That being said, him expanding his power base and creating a full organization in his image is not something I have a lot of confidence in.
What's Ray Bourque's current role with the club? I have him in my mind as a team consultant, but am curious if he comes more into the fold at some point. Not sure if management and/or coaching is something he's ever been interested in but I can't think of a bigger Bruins legend still in the area that could start developing the D for the post-Chara era.
Sorry Jacobs, if you weren't ready to answer that question, don't go on TV.
This is Neely's team and has been since early in 2015. That's what I'm getting out of all this, which personally, I'm more than fine with if this is the direction they go in.
This is Neely's team and has been since early in 2015. That's what I'm getting out of all this, which personally, I'm more than fine with if this is the direction they go in.
Presser on now
- Ongoing dialogue, decided last night that Chiarelli would go
- Chiarelli was not handcuffed by ultimatum to not trade 1st rounder at deadline, simply was told not to trade the future for rentals
- Claude staying with the club remains with the incoming GM
Yikes, when pressed, CJ drops a "Cam, can ya help me out with this one"
- "We are where we are, so tough to answer that" - Cam on being asked whether PC would still be here if they'd made the playoffs
- Ongoing dialogue, decided last night that Chiarelli would go
- Chiarelli was not handcuffed by ultimatum to not trade 1st rounder at deadline, simply was told not to trade the future for rentals
- Claude staying with the club remains with the incoming GM
Yikes, when pressed, CJ drops a "Cam, can ya help me out with this one"
- "We are where we are, so tough to answer that" - Cam on being asked whether PC would still be here if they'd made the playoffs
PedroSpecialK said:
CJ asking Cam to address it is kinda like when someone takes a run at Pastrnak and McQuaid responds. Or something.
Sounds to me like Cam doesn't like the direction the team's gone in in terms of physical play and tone.
I would expect a hitter or two in here come next year.
I would expect a hitter or two in here come next year.
"I signed a contract to coach here, I want to coach here" - Claude, when asked whether he'd want the opportunity to coach elsewhere.
Great to hear.
Great to hear.
Jacobs reminds me of students that come into class knowing I roll with Socratic method, but they didn't do the readings.
No push from younger guys in camp was unexpected; Neely goes on to say team whiffed in drafts 3 or 4 times and that played a role.
Neely's comment regarding the young D makes the Boychuck trade even more dumb than it already looked. If you were surprised none of your young D progressed more than why did you go and trade quality away? It makes no sense.
I love the joke cause I give my Pitt friends shit all the time. But MAF (2003 #1), Malkin (2004 #2), and Crosby (2005 #1) were under the previous GM. Shero's first draft was 2006 which was J Staal (#2). Still, who did the Pens pay off for those 4 years.kenneycb said:
Not a very confident inspiring press conference.
We'll have to see where the chips fall over the next month or two when they hire a new GM.
We'll have to see where the chips fall over the next month or two when they hire a new GM.
Very mixed bag by Jacobs and Neely. Does seem like they're setting up an internal hire to keep Claude or holding on to Claude to entice a pick or two out of someone. Doesn't seem likely any outside hire GM will want to keep him.
Interesting comments from Fluto and along the lines of what I saw in that presser. Sounds to me like it's going to be a Sweeney/Neely tag team while they do some interviews to fill out the process and show their work.
The big question, to me anyway, is now what happens with coach.
The big question, to me anyway, is now what happens with coach.
Sweeney is a candidate I could get behind. My guess is they bring Gorton back, hand him the reins and he keeps Julien. Cleans the roster of the Kelly types moves a big piece for youth and doubles down on development while he deals with what's likely to be a lowering cap situation till he can make a FA splash or two. At least that's my hope.
McBride11 said:
Well they were terrible those years, so where were they supposed to draft, 17th? Edmonton had three #1 picks in a row and might have four in six years, but I don't see anybody getting the vapors over that, I guess b/c they're still terrible.
BTW Fleury they traded up from 3 to 1 for and Malkin they had the worst record in the league and lost the lottery to the Capitals.
Could be holding Claude because they are on the hook for the difference between what they are paying him and his current contract. So another team could hire him at minimum wage and let the Bruins pay him. If he is their property and another team wants him the Bruins can maybe get out from under his deal. (That seems more likely than draft pick compensation).Titoschew said:
Plus the guys they drafted range from good to mediocre because their didn't happen to be a generational talent in the draft. Regardless I don't like you ruining my joke with your so called "facts" and "reason" and "logic".Greg29fan said: