Prospect Info: 2020 Draft #111 - Mitchell Miller (RHD) [Mod Warning post #312]

Status
Not open for further replies.

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
I think that quite a bit of failures happened with Miller.

Miller was obviously doled out his punishment, but the question comes back to whether or not he understands the severity of this. If this is considered "no big deal" to him and the letter writing was more for show, then yes, there should be a lot more time spent to change that direction.

I look at what sort of support system the player had around him. Upon the incident taking place, did the player and the support system treat it seriously? Family, counselors, doctors, teachers, coaches, even friends, to a degree.

I see this as someone who went and talked with a therapist or counselor, however, just going and talking does not necessarily mean progress has been made. Things like that can identify why a person may act that way, but until the person has an internal review of themselves with the guidance of working on those issues, there won't be something to fix until that person becomes engaged in fixing it.

I do believe that the support system (which includes hockey and coaching staffs) did not provide more of the guidance needed. If this exact attitude had been taken by the USHL, as a whole, then maybe the player would realize that this is the start to a potential future, and if not being able to play in the USHL is a part of the consequence, then he needs to act accordingly.

I think it is a case of someone who is willing to show responsibility, but it has to be on his terms. That is great for something you are good at, like a sport. That may not balance your responsibilities in other aspects of life. That is what got him to this point.

It definitely sucks that it reached this point as well, but if there were more clear efforts by programs to get him help, I think that come-uppance would be much more tangible and beneficial. Now, instead of support, he may move to a different country to play. Can't say for sure if that is the proper support needed.
 

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
97,465
46,394
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
It's actually incredibly hilarious that no one ever decided to do this until long after the draft even happened. Due Diligence just doesn't exist, I guess.
Re-open an old wound 31 times? Have 31 teams call a woman not even involved in hockey and ask her to relive some hurtful times that she went through four years ago?

Maybe that’s the right thing. I’m not saying it’s not. But I can see how one might decide against it.

Think of one of the most hurtful things that’s happened to you. Think of a time when someone else has willingly caused you to suffer. Now imagine that 31 restaurant executives wanted to call and talk about it.

So go ahead and spend 30 minutes reliving on the phone with the CEO of each of...

1. Dunkin’ Donuts
2. Wendy’s
3. McDonald’s
4. Starbucks
5. Jimmy John’s
6. Burger King
7. Dairy Queen
8. Arby’s
9. Sonic
10. Carl’s Junior
11. Taco Bell
12. Popeye’s
13. KFC
14. Pizza Hut
15. Panera
16. Applebee’s
17. Chili’s
18. Church’s
19. Jack in the Box
20. IHOP
21. Little Caesar’s
22. Papa John’s
23. Buffalo Wild Wings
24. Del Taco
25. Domino’s
26. Olive Garden
27. Denny’s
28. Whataburger
29. Cracker Barrel
30. Golden Corral
31. Waffle House

Sound fun to spend time reliving that hurt with 31 total random CEOs in an industry you don’t care about in the least?

I mean really imagine it. Imagine they were all emailing you and trying to find time in your schedule and you needed to organize these conversations just to talk about someone you hate that wronged you.

Again. Maybe it would have been the right thing to do. But I think we can see why the other decision was made, no?

Can we at least entertain the idea that it wasn’t callous, lazy, uncaring or stupid? Can we maybe suggest that maybe they had other reason? Like maybe it wasn’t appropriate?
 
Last edited:

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
97,465
46,394
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
There were probably an awful lot of D1 schools looking at him too. He committed to at least two. I have to think a couple of dozen of them were recruiting him. So 24 more phone calls with D1 hockey coaches?

What about Sarnia? They drafted him. I bet a bunch of other OHL teams were interested. Maybe 15 more calla with OHL GMs?

Is 75 phone calls lasting 30 minutes each and consisting exclusively of painful memories too many?
 

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
97,465
46,394
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
Over the last few months I’ve listened to a ton of in depth interviews with various hockey executives. None of them struck me as lacking in intelligence, empathy, or interpersonal ability. All of them have been husbands and fathers. Family men.

I think it’s possible they considered their options and made the choice they felt was right and that it wasn’t based solely on self-interest.

I’m not saying that’s true. I’m saying it’s a different angle to look at things. It’s good to think about things from different angles. That’s all I’m saying.
 

bodechek

Registered User
Oct 10, 2017
298
234
You have to wonder how lazy or incompetent some staff members really are. A third of NHL teams did their due diligence and already decided not to draft him. University of North Dakota and USA hockey both let him down by giving him a chance to play. But I have to question about Mitchell's upbringing. What has the parents done to guide him thru all this. After a guilty conviction to the bullying incident, you would of figured that they would guide him to personally apologize. And to be clear, just because a court forced you to apologize, doesn't mean it is sincere. Which is what a third of the NHL teams believed when they dug into it.
 

RemoAZ

Let it burn
Mar 30, 2010
11,152
7,487
Glendale, Arizona
No changes yet. HIS guy was the one running the draft.
I don't think there will be any changes or any more talk about this kid from the organization. I totally believe they were taking a chance on the kid because he was rated talent-wise a lot higher than they were picking. They had few picks so they took a shot. Then the organization realised it wasn't worth the PR hit they were taking so they cut bait. It was as simple as that imo and now they'll move on. With the lack of talent and picks in the organization, I think it was a smart gamble. Win some, lose some.
 

CLW

Registered User
Nov 11, 2018
6,833
6,431
I don't think there will be any changes or any more talk about this kid from the organization. I totally believe they were taking a chance on the kid because he was rated talent-wise a lot higher than they were picking. They had few picks so they took a shot. Then the organization realised it wasn't worth the PR hit they were taking so they cut bait. It was as simple as that imo and now they'll move on. With the lack of talent and picks in the organization, I think it was a smart gamble. Win some, lose some.

Well, they can't do that. They already promised they would do an internal review. If they try to pretend this never happened, and refuse to be upfront with the fans about it, I'll lose respect for them completely. To run away from the mess without fixing anything, on top of demonstrated bad judgement and poor work, would take things firmly into GONG SHOW territory.

We are supposed to have professionals in charge now. Prove it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad