News Article: Was Chevy close to blowing it up?

[Mortimer Snerd]

That is not accurate at all . Under Chevy's direction and influence , Winnipeg dramatically increased their scouting department and the money allocated to it.

Chevy mentioned he said to Chipman that he didn't view scouting as an expense and Chipman to his credit told him he agreed and that it would never be an issue for the cost involved.

When the lock out occurred many organizations pared down their scouting department , Winnipeg increased theirs , including Chevy being out and seeing tonnes of games in person . The comment he made was that no organization would prioritize scouting more than Winnipeg ( some may be equal but none more ) . Many independent scouts and hockey people have commented on how Winnipeg has people "everywhere" .

The heavy lifting has been done under Chevy's blueprint. Just this last year , when Chevy was at one of Ehler's games , he was asked why he was there , when he said it was to watch Ehlers , the comment was why? he won't last to your pick ... well maybe some other GM's needed to be at more games . Chevy goes to a lot of games , I don't know the exact breakdown but I would wager he sees more games in person than most GM's.

If anyone thinks this isn't Chevy's scouting staff and that he doesn't influence it dramatically or that he doesn't have final say for direction and selection they are quite simply wrong.

That's well said.

 

[Whileee]

That's weird. You'd think they'd cut amateur scouting staff if Chevy was personally scouting and drafting all the players.

Sure, and Chevy's probably personally scouting all of the pros and amateurs to make good decisions on trades. His scouts have nothing to do with that end of the business, of course.

 

[Ducky10]

It was the GM who decided which of Atlanta's scouts to keep and which ones to part with. It was the GM who decided to have twice as many amateur scouts. It was the GM who decided to make character a top priority. It was the GM who defined the type of player they are looking for. He then told the scouts to go out and find players of that type. It is the GM who listens to all the arguments among the scouts over which player to rank above which other players and makes the final decision.

The scouts identify the players, they are the most influential people in the drafting of players. Nobody is arguing your other points, they just add noise.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The scouts identify the players, they are the most influential people in the drafting of players. Nobody is arguing your other points, they just add noise.

So do you credit the GM for successful drafting or not?

 

[Ducky10]

So do you credit the GM for successful drafting or not?

Only in the sense that he is responsible for the machine, the same machine he is also responsible for if the drafting isn't successful.

Drafting is a crap shoot at the best of times.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Only in the sense that he is responsible for the machine, the same machine he is also responsible for if the drafting isn't successful.

Drafting is a crap shoot at the best of times.

Fair enough. But I think you are underrating the actual final decision. Several people will get to express their opinion. They may all agree or there may be a consensus, or not. At some point Chevy says something to the effect of: "Does anybody have anything to add? No? Alright we will take xxx" who may or may not be the one most supported by the others. At that point nothing that anyone else has or has not said matters.

 

[Ducky10]

Fair enough. But I think you are underrating the actual final decision. Several people will get to express their opinion. They may all agree or there may be a consensus, or not. At some point Chevy says something to the effect of: "Does anybody have anything to add? No? Alright we will take xxx" who may or may not be the one most supported by the others. At that point nothing that anyone else has or has not said matters.

Well I don't presume to know how the conversation goes, having never been in a war room myself. Sure, Chevy makes the pick, made possible by the information he is given by his Director of Scouting. I don't think I'm underrating the final decision, I think by the time he makes it most of the heavy lifting is done, some of which is his but mostly not.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Well I don't presume to know how the conversation goes, having never been in a war room myself. Sure, Chevy makes the pick, made possible by the information he is given by his Director of Scouting. I don't think I'm underrating the final decision, I think by the time he makes it most of the heavy lifting is done, some of which is his but mostly not.

There is where we are talking at cross purposes. Traveling around the country watching hockey is the easy part. Forming opinions and giving advice is the easy part. That final decision is the heavy lifting.

Think of Eisenhower having to decide whether to invade Europe in bad weather or to delay up to a year. Think of Truman having to decide whether to drop the bomb on Japan or invade. Do you think they made those decisions without the advice of experts more knowledgeable than themselves? Where in the world, where in life do the decision makers, the responsibility takers, the leaders not get paid more than the foot soldiers?

 

[Ducky10]

There is where we are talking at cross purposes. Traveling around the country watching hockey is the easy part. Forming opinions and giving advice is the easy part. That final decision is the heavy lifting.

Think of Eisenhower having to decide whether to invade Europe in bad weather or to delay up to a year. Think of Truman having to decide whether to drop the bomb on Japan or invade. Do you think they made those decisions without the advice of experts more knowledgeable than themselves? Where in the world, where in life do the decision makers, the responsibility takers, the leaders not get paid more than the foot soldiers?

I don't think we're at cross purposes at all actually, I understand and accept that Chevy's role carries the heaviest burden in as much as he's the guy who has to ultimately pull the trigger, no different than Ike. As far as magnitude and responsibility goes, yes that's why they get the big bucks, they need to know the correct decision to make.

It's just not the most hands on part of their job and the one they rely most heavily on others for direction, that's all. I disagree that travelling around identifying players and making recommendations that are required for him to make the best decisions is easy, they are the ones that shape the decisions

 

[White Out 403*]

There is where we are talking at cross purposes. Traveling around the country watching hockey is the easy part. Forming opinions and giving advice is the easy part. That final decision is the heavy lifting.

Think of Eisenhower having to decide whether to invade Europe in bad weather or to delay up to a year. Think of Truman having to decide whether to drop the bomb on Japan or invade. Do you think they made those decisions without the advice of experts more knowledgeable than themselves? Where in the world, where in life do the decision makers, the responsibility takers, the leaders not get paid more than the foot soldiers?

I cant even begin to describe how bad this post is. You're comparing NHL drafting to using a nuclear weapon to end war?

The heavy lifting is done by the scouts. Period. Chevy only can make an informed decision and usually goes with what the scouts recommend, would by my assertion.


As for your nukes comparison.. jesus. lol. Billy Madison comes to mind.

 

[KingBogo]

I cant even begin to describe how bad this post is. You're comparing NHL drafting to using a nuclear weapon to end war?

The heavy lifting is done by the scouts. Period. Chevy only can make an informed decision and usually goes with what the scouts recommend, would by my assertion.


As for your nukes comparison.. jesus. lol. Billy Madison comes to mind.

IMO this debate comes down to who to you give more credit for success. The person on top who give the orders/direction and makes the decisions. And bears the responsibility for success or failure. Or the employees down the line who follow the orders/direction. Gather the information, toil on the frontlines and offer opinions and rationale when asked. My guess is we all have our biases on this leaning towards the role we play in our real lives.

 

[Hunter368]

IMO this debate comes down to who to you give more credit for success. The person on top who give the orders/direction and makes the decisions. And bears the responsibility for success or failure. Or the employees down the line who follow the orders/direction. Gather the information, toil on the frontlines and offer opinions and rationale when asked. My guess is we all have our biases on this leaning towards the role we play in our real lives.

Agreed and a fair comment.

 

[Ducky10]

IMO this debate comes down to who to you give more credit for success. The person on top who give the orders/direction and makes the decisions. And bears the responsibility for success or failure. Or the employees down the line who follow the orders/direction. Gather the information, toil on the frontlines and offer opinions and rationale when asked. My guess is we all have our biases on this leaning towards the role we play in our real lives.

That's a fair point but oddly enough my stance is quite opposite to what I do in my professional life. That could mean a few things I guess.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I don't think we're at cross purposes at all actually, I understand and accept that Chevy's role carries the heaviest burden in as much as he's the guy who has to ultimately pull the trigger, no different than Ike. As far as magnitude and responsibility goes, yes that's why they get the big bucks, they need to know the correct decision to make.

It's just not the most hands on part of their job and the one they rely most heavily on others for direction, that's all. I disagree that travelling around identifying players and making recommendations that are required for him to make the best decisions is easy, they are the ones that shape the decisions

Why is 'hands on' so important? Yes, somebody has to do it and we need it done well but we can say that about everything. Being an NHL scout is not an 'easy job' compared to all other jobs. Not everyone can do it. They provide data that helps shape the decisions but I wouldn't agree that they shape the decisions. They participate in it. They have input into it. But everything is done within the framework established by the GM. He sets the priorities and criteria that the decision will be based on and then in the end makes the decision.

The same scouts worked the '10 & '11 drafts. In '10 they got Burmi, Melchiori & Telegin with their first 3 picks. In '11 they got Scheifele, Lowry and Serville. What was the difference?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I cant even begin to describe how bad this post is. You're comparing NHL drafting to using a nuclear weapon to end war?

The heavy lifting is done by the scouts. Period. Chevy only can make an informed decision and usually goes with what the scouts recommend, would by my assertion.


As for your nukes comparison.. jesus. lol. Billy Madison comes to mind.

Not comparing at all. Come on! It is decision making and it takes an extreme example to make the point. The rest of your post makes clear that even an extreme example was not BIG enough. The important part of the process is not the data gathering it is the decision making.

You don't like big examples I'll give you a smaller one. Who is more influential in producing the car you drive? The engineers who designed it or the guy on the production line with a wrench in his hands? The guy on the production line is a lot more hands on.

 

[Ducky10]

Why is 'hands on' so important? Yes, somebody has to do it and we need it done well but we can say that about everything. Being an NHL scout is not an 'easy job' compared to all other jobs. Not everyone can do it. They provide data that helps shape the decisions but I wouldn't agree that they shape the decisions. They participate in it. They have input into it. But everything is done within the framework established by the GM. He sets the priorities and criteria that the decision will be based on and then in the end makes the decision.

The same scouts worked the '10 & '11 drafts. In '10 they got Burmi, Melchiori & Telegin with their first 3 picks. In '11 they got Scheifele, Lowry and Serville. What was the difference?

I think you underestimate how much the head scouts are part of the decision making process, you think I underestimate Chevy, I realize he makes the final call, based on information and expertise provided by others. I said in my initial post the exact same thing you just said "he set's the priorities and the criteria". I get that, I just don't get how much some people underestimate how much the scouting director has to do with draft decisions.

The difference in those drafts? The players available, you're presuming to know who Chevy may have selected in the 10-11 draft? That's way too hypothetical for me.

 

[White Out 403*]

You don't like big examples I'll give you a smaller one. Who is more influential in producing the car you drive? The engineers who designed it or the guy on the production line with a wrench in his hands? The guy on the production line is a lot more hands on.

I think the better comparison would be the scouts are the engineers, and, the GM would be the CEO.

I'd vote engineers. Why on Earth would you call the scouts the wrench guys? Laughable comparison.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I think the better comparison would be the scouts are the engineers, and, the GM would be the CEO.

I'd vote engineers. Why on Earth would you call the scouts the wrench guys? Laughable comparison.

Not laughable. It's actually a bit silly that we're arguing the semantics of the comparison, IMHO.

My take - someone needs to architect the plan based on a vision for the team (Chevy), then others need to execute on that plan to bring the vision to life (the scouts).

Both can share blame or praise if the plan or the execution of the plan fails or succeeds.

 

[White Out 403*]

Not laughable. It's actually a bit silly that we're arguing the semantics of the comparison, IMHO.

My take - someone needs to architect the plan based on a vision for the team (Chevy), then others need to execute on that plan to bring the vision to life (the scouts).

Both can share blame or praise if the plan or the execution of the plan fails or succeeds.

It is laughable because guys oh the assembly line have zero say in the final product. Its manual labour. Scouts on the other hand have to objectively make critical decisions use their noggin.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

It is laughable because guys oh the assembly line have zero say in the final product. Its manual labour. Scouts on the other hand have to objectively make critical decisions use their noggin.

Ok then - I didn't make the comparison, I'm just pointing out that we're not even arguing the points anymore, rather the semantics of the comparisons.

I think we should get back to the original topic, myself.

 

[White Out 403*]

perhaps anthier chevy thread is needed? The scope of this seems rather narrow

 

[YWGinYYZ]

perhaps anthier chevy thread is needed? The scope of this seems rather narrow

I think the general direction that the conversation is taking fine, but arguing how apt the comparisons are is taking the thread in a weird direction and is masking the underlying points you guys are trying to make. S'all I'm saying.

 

[Potrzebie]

What final say to assembly line workers have on the final product? Zero. Literally.

Terrible comparison is terrible.

I work in IT. We recently replaced a bunch of aging equipment. Several of us evaluated a tonne of equipment, then made our recommendation to our boss as to what to buy. We did the ground work but the ultimate decision and responsibility (and success or failure) is his.

PS: He ignored our recommendation and bought the cheapest stuff he could find. True story.

 

[Bartho]

It's quite clear Chevy doesn't do anything. Even free agent signings have to be agreed to by the player and the player's agent leaving Chevy a maximum 33% credit for any deal.

 

[ps241]

I look at the a Scouting GM relationship as pretty collaborative. keep in mind there is a layer between Chevy and the scouts with the director of Pro Scouting and director of amature Scouting. Chevy is ultimately responsible for the vision and putting the key people in place to get results.. Director of pro and amature are most likely responsible for individual Scouts work product quality.

Unless anyone of us is a fly on the wall its tough to tell how involved Chevy is with this group in the field and in the boardroom. Different managers have really different styles as far as level of hands on involvement goes?