TBN: Moulson's blames season on lack of confidence/ Murray blames work ethic

[joshjull]

What I'm saying is that this Moulson/Murray issue with Moulson's questionable workout has already been squashed. Murray said they talked to the Moulson. In my eyes, this is a nonissue to me. There was zero reason why this article had to be written.

Sure they talked to Murray and told them what he did. But did the article really need to be written? It's not as of this is taking place now. It took place in the past. Why write about something that happened a little bit ago and already taken care of?

Instead, readers will be talking about this happening now.

You obviously didn't pay attention to how this happened. Murray brought up all the stuff about Moulson on WGR before Thursday's game when on with Schopp/Bulldog. The follow ups were the next day by Vogl and others. Frankly you sound ridiculous complaining that a article was written based on our GM publicly calling out one of our players the day after he publicly called out said player for not putting the work in.

 

[joshjull]

The reality is Murray called out Moulson publicly Thursday and it was pretty much unsolicited. Murray and no one else is responsible for that. Of course the press covering the team is going to write about it.

 

[joshjull]

I love Murray publicly calling out Moulson.

I do to. When added to his comments about how he handles trades for his players. That he looks for a good fit and tries to get them onto good situation. Its pretty obvious that if you do right by Murray he'll do right by you. Even when he needs to move you. But if you don't do the work he won't hesitate to get on you.

 

[Jame]

I do to. When added to his comments about how he handles trades for his players. That he looks for a good fit and tries to get them onto good situation. Its pretty obvious that if you do right by Murray he'll do right by you. Even when he needs to move you. But if you don't do the work he won't hesitate to get on you.

Yup, and a very young roster is seeing that

 

[signalIInoise]

Truth is, Moulson is a grown-*** man. When you're a grown-*** man, you're responsible for yourself. In the world of grown-*** men, and you let down your team/coworkers/family, you get called-out in one way or another, and you fix it or it snowballs on you. Like it or not, shame is a hell of a motivator, and Moulson now has one to grow on. Murray simply acknowledged that Matt is letting his team down.

 

[Baccus]

The reality is Murray called out Moulson publicly Thursday and it was pretty much unsolicited. Murray and no one else is responsible for that. Of course the press covering the team is going to write about it.

Murray was asked if he thought Moulson was in a slump or had totally lost it, so I wouldn't say it was unsolicited.

If he had really wanted to throw Moulson under the bus he could have said he fears the wheels had come off for good. Obviously he was sending a message and nothing wrong with that, he's got 3 more years and is playing like crap.

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

Truth is, Moulson is a grown-*** man. When you're a grown-*** man, you're responsible for yourself. In the world of grown-*** men, and you let down your team/coworkers/family, you get called-out in one way or another, and you fix it or it snowballs on you. Like it or not, shame is a hell of a motivator, and Moulson now has one to grow on. Murray simply acknowledged that Matt is letting his team down.

I'm sure that's an effective management strategy at McDonald's but otherwise this reeks of gotcha journalism.

 

[Husko]

I have no problem with Murray's comments, Moulson's comments, or the articles being written. I do have a problem with them essentially setting up Moulson in the interview (at least that's the vibe I got).

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

I have no problem with Murray's comments, Moulson's comments, or the articles being written. I do have a problem with them essentially setting up Moulson in the interview (at least that's the vibe I got).

Nailed it

 

[haseoke39]

What I'm saying is that this Moulson/Murray issue with Moulson's questionable workout has already been squashed. Murray said they talked to the Moulson. In my eyes, this is a nonissue to me. There was zero reason why this article had to be written.

Sure they talked to Murray and told them what he did. But did the article really need to be written? It's not as of this is taking place now. It took place in the past. Why write about something that happened a little bit ago and already taken care of?

Instead, readers will be talking about this happening now.

....So your issue is about writing about things in the past?

That's most of the news.

And besides which, it's ongoing. He's presently on a team-instituted workout plan to be ready to play next season. He will remain so for months.

 

[signalIInoise]

I'm sure that's an effective management strategy at McDonald's but otherwise this reeks of gotcha journalism.

Gotcha journalism -- no such thing. There's barely such a thing as sports journalism. The myth of 'gotcha' journalism has come to us through the jaundiced lens of the Sarah Palins of the world, who want journalists to offer only slightly rewritten press releases. Those complaining of 'gotcha' journalists are solely those who don't want to defend their BS -- and want media to simply parrot what they're told.

McDonalds, yes -- and everywhere else, too. If there's no accountability, there's only coddling and failure. The reporter is filling column inches, Murray is running his team, and Moulson is required to hold his end up. He has a $25M contract, which is not likely to be seen at any McDonalds or in almost any other workplace. Hockey players should be expected to be professionals and adults as much as anyone else.

 

[SoFFacet]

Gotcha journalism -- no such thing. There's barely such a thing as sports journalism. The myth of 'gotcha' journalism has come to us through the jaundiced lens of the Sarah Palins of the world, who want journalists to offer only slightly rewritten press releases. Those complaining of 'gotcha' journalists are solely those who don't want to defend their BS -- and want media to simply parrot what they're told.

McDonalds, yes -- and everywhere else, too. If there's no accountability, there's only coddling and failure. The reporter is filling column inches, Murray is running his team, and Moulson is required to hold his end up. He has a $25M contract, which is not likely to be seen at any McDonalds or in almost any other workplace. Hockey players should be expected to be professionals and adults as much as anyone else.

I also recoil at the stench of the phrase "gotcha journalism," but in this particular case they definitely set Moulson up. He would never publicly admit to bad habits / laziness / whatever if he could just deadpan and let the question roll off his back. But he would be willing to toe the line if he were aware that the GM had made public comments. So his response to that question was always going to be heavily conditional on whether or not he was aware of TM's previous interview.

 

[haseoke39]

I also recoil at the stench of the phrase "gotcha journalism," but in this particular case they definitely set Moulson up. He would never publicly admit to bad habits / laziness / whatever if he could just deadpan and let the question roll off his back. But he would be willing to toe the line if he were aware that the GM had made public comments. So his response to that question was always going to be heavily conditional on whether or not he was aware of TM's previous interview.

If I'm the journalist, I'm assuming Murray and Moulson have agreed that these are public talking points. I don't go in assuming I have to prepare Moulson for public humiliation, because it's basic professional courtesy to let your players know you're going to the media with your complaints. I just go in and ask.

 

[Chad Thundercock]

What do you think is the real issue?

Moulson is 32, in decline, and was a flawed player even in his prime. He's just not good, and the contract was a poor idea like I thought when it happened.

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

Gotcha journalism -- no such thing. There's barely such a thing as sports journalism. The myth of 'gotcha' journalism has come to us through the jaundiced lens of the Sarah Palins of the world, who want journalists to offer only slightly rewritten press releases. Those complaining of 'gotcha' journalists are solely those who don't want to defend their BS -- and want media to simply parrot what they're told.

McDonalds, yes -- and everywhere else, too. If there's no accountability, there's only coddling and failure. The reporter is filling column inches, Murray is running his team, and Moulson is required to hold his end up. He has a $25M contract, which is not likely to be seen at any McDonalds or in almost any other workplace. Hockey players should be expected to be professionals and adults as much as anyone else.

Ah I see where we just aren't going to align with things. I understand that phrase has been a little twisted under a certain political lens and it's easy to wave that flag. But I'm not referring to it in a political context. I do like Murray being a little tough and shrewd. Someone needs to be the adult in the room. Moulson should talk about it and keep it transparent. You could argue this should have been "investigated" a little earlier in the season. The last jab by the reporter to swat the beehive and write about the results is unnecessary. That's Toronto crap. How many cups have they won recently with the media doing that? And, typically, BN has somehow inserted themselves in the narrative yet again.

We might as well be an expansion team this year. I get that it all looks good on paper but maybe I'm just a little more willing to give most of these players a mulligan for the season given the team's basically been built from scratch for less than a year. It's enough for me to read what the plan is going forward and revisiting those goals in the future. Moulson isn't a 30 goal scorer this year. But it's not like he's gone full Leino / Hodgson year over year.

 

[joshjull]

Murray was asked if he thought Moulson was in a slump or had totally lost it, so I wouldn't say it was unsolicited.

If he had really wanted to throw Moulson under the bus he could have said he fears the wheels had come off for good. Obviously he was sending a message and nothing wrong with that, he's got 3 more years and is playing like crap.

I'm aware of that. But there was nothing in what he was asked to suggest Murray was going to go down the path he did. Hell he compared Moulson's situation to being injured, said he developed bad habits, lost his way if you will. None of that was because of the media. It was Murray and I like that he did it.

 

[BowieSabresFan]

I'm aware of that. But there was nothing in what he was asked to suggest Murray was going to go down the path he did. Hell he compared Moulson's situation to being injured, said he developed bad habits, lost his way if you will. None of that was because of the media. It was Murray and I like that he did it.

Then you do it privately. I'm not a fan of trashing players in public, and never will be. It's rarely productive for anyone involved.

 

[wunderpanda]

Hmm, so the 30+ year old should be protected after getting a huge contract and then playing at an ahl level, maybe.

So the 50+ year old that gave him the bad contract should be protected instead? Murray could have stopped after mentioning the extra work Moulson has been doing, he had made his point already. I'm fine with what he said to that point. Calling into question an employees work ethic, in public, was not needed for any other reason than for Murray to Murray.

Murray claims he knew for years Moulson was slacking
Murray gave him $25 million anyway
Murray had Jack move in with the Moulsons

Murray then deflects blame for the situation onto Moulson for being exactly what Murray bought. and what Murray bought was good enough to trust as a foster family for the single most important factor is his future success as a GM.

Nope, calling BS on Murray for this. Just like firing Nolan over win-loss record and second guessing Bylsma on the radio weekly.

 

[Cirris]

Murray's candidness still surprises me.

I'm happy to hear that there's a plan in place and that Moulson is taking some steps.

I didn't read the article. it's behind a pay wall and i used up my free reads. But, was the question, "Do you regret signing Moulson for 5 years?" directed at Murray?

Cause it's obviously looking like Murray will be in Cap hell for 2 years if he has to buy out Moulson this year.

 

[Dex]

I didn't read the article. it's behind a pay wall and i used up my free reads. But, was the question, "Do you regret signing Moulson for 5 years?" directed at Murray?

Cause it's obviously looking like Murray will be in Cap hell for 2 years if he has to buy out Moulson this year.

Murray's comments were on WGR. You can listen online.

Moulson was interviewed by the Buffalo News the next day and the gist of what transpired is contained in the preceding posts.

 

[Cirris]

Murray's comments were on WGR. You can listen online.

Moulson was interviewed by the Buffalo News the next day and the gist of what transpired is contained in the preceding posts.

K thank you.

Tim Murray interview - 3/3 WGR Bulldog

found it and link it.

 

[Heraldic]

Not related to this Moulson thing.

But I think there has been a clear difference on his tone regarding UFA players compared to last season.

Last season he blatantly said that players are assets and he is going to move everyone he can for any asset (and he did).

This season he said that while they are trying to get assets, the tone was more "human". And by this I mean that he said that he is not eagerly making calls to shop players. And he even brought up the situation where he didn't want to move a player for minimal return into a bad situation for that player. Regarding McGinn he underlined that he thought Anaheim was a good fit for McGinn himself.

I was just wondering, that might the change in his tone (as far as I interpreted it), be a result of Murray perhaps getting a criticism of his not-that-player-friendly approach, and the fact, that we're closing the moment we might want to add long-term pieces through FA or players needing to waive off to come here.

 

[old kummelweck]

May as well get him working harder now with an eye toward next season since it seems prohibitive to buy him out this summer. Lighter, stronger... not much they can do about his overall lack of foot-speed though.

I was considering this yesterday. Nolan and the previous coaching staff was on their way out during last seasons exit interviews. The org was in disarray and transition - I would be surprised if they took the time to make sure guys like Moulson were evaluated properly and given the right off-season regiment.

 

[Chainshot]

I was considering this yesterday. Nolan and the previous coaching staff was on their way out during last seasons exit interviews. The org was in disarray and transition - I would be surprised if they took the time to make sure guys like Moulson were evaluated properly and given the right off-season regiment.

Possibly. Or they may have made an assumption about Moulson's off-ice habits that was not born out and lead to Murray's comments.

Either way, Moulson's disappearance was at least foreshadowed by his play down the stretch last year. Murray can't be happy with having the two wingers from his "top line" that ended last season combining for 8 goals and 24 points on the year after 33 and 87 in last year's tire fire.

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

So the 50+ year old that gave him the bad contract should be protected instead? Murray could have stopped after mentioning the extra work Moulson has been doing, he had made his point already. I'm fine with what he said to that point. Calling into question an employees work ethic, in public, was not needed for any other reason than for Murray to Murray.

Murray claims he knew for years Moulson was slacking
Murray gave him $25 million anyway
Murray had Jack move in with the Moulsons

Murray then deflects blame for the situation onto Moulson for being exactly what Murray bought. and what Murray bought was good enough to trust as a foster family for the single most important factor is his future success as a GM.

Nope, calling BS on Murray for this. Just like firing Nolan over win-loss record and second guessing Bylsma on the radio weekly.

I agree to some extent. Murray's willingness to call others out is lauded as refreshing candor, yet he rarely points the finger directly at himself. Still, I do believe he was trying to light a fire and fix the situation.