Bryan Murray deserve so much more credit

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,714
6,803
Actually, the opposite. Youve done nothing to refute any of the theses put forth by people youre arguing with. You have your opinion but all your proof that you offer is already refuted by the posts you respond to.

To say that Muckler was anything more than a disastrous GM for Ottawa... well, thats stupid.

Stability is the key in hockey to success, it’s what every franchise strive for, to say Muckler didn’t make any big moves he just had elite teams and 2 elite coaches is just a stupid argument. To point to Murray and say he did a ton of moves and hired a ton of coaches, activity that only made the team worse is a very bad argument.

I dont need to refute anything, just look at the standings and results. fans saying Muckler only had 2 coaches (Martin and Murray) and they were the two best in our history, the best teams, Thebest crowds, the most respect across the NHL, was a destination for players (Hossa, Alfie, Redden, Fisher) all wanted to stay, the best stability it’s all there in the record.

To use an argument that Murray was busy all the time isn’t a good argument. Look at the recent elite teams (Detroit extremely stable with the same coach and core players / Chicago same coach are core players / Pitt a couple of coaches the same core players) - it’s what elite teams do, they keep their elite players and make the playoffs every year and win.
 

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,714
6,803
Murray also inherited an elite team as Mukler did - Muckler managed to win with his and take it further, Murray had his explode in his face 40 games into his GM job.

When we made the first finals the majority of pundits picked us to win the Cup and the year Murray took over a ton of pundits predicted we’d be elite again, Murray didn’t manage his elite team well or build a winner. His record was underachievement at first and then Ottawa was just a gong show from that point on.
 

Hale The Villain

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2008
25,658
13,243
The way I see it, Murray was almost as incompetent as Dorion when it comes to trades/signings, but he was just far more respected and experienced, and was able to temper Melnyk's worst impulses. While that looks huge right now, that still doesn't make him a good GM. Guy got bent over on almost every big trade he made:

- Turned a 40-50G scoring Heatley into Michalek, Cheechoo, 2nd
- Got Chiasson, Paul, 2nd for a Spezza when he was still a #1 center
- Silfverberg, Noesen, 1st for Ryan has worked out terrribly
- Taking on Phaneuf's horrible deal and giving up Lindberg (a decent prospect at the time) and a 2nd was stupid
- Trading two 2nds to rent Cullen and Sutton in a year we weren't a legit contender wasn't smart

Even the good trades he made, he ended up screwing up afterwards:

- Turned Meszaros into Kuba, 1st, but then decided to deal that 1st for Campoli and a rental in Comrie
- Got Bishop for a 2nd, but then dealt him for Conacher, who promptly busted
- Trading a 1st (which should have been used on Tarasenko if we didn't have a policy of never selecting Russians playing in Russia) for Rundblad was bad, but turning Rundblad and a 2nd into Turris was good.

Elliott for Anderson, Foligno for Methot and Lehner for a 1st were deals that ended up being good for us, but I think he lost far more trades than he won.

And I was never a fan of his inability (or unwillingness) to bottom out in years when we were clearly out of the playoff race. He made the Anderson, Phaneuf and Campoli+Comrie acquisitions when we had little to no chance of making the playoffs, and those acquisitions likely ended up moving us up the standings by enough to make a big difference on draft day. If he didn't make those deals, we could have ended up with better prospects than Zibanejad, Brown and Cowen in those years.

Being a better GM than Dorion isn't saying a whole lot. Murray was a pretty bad GM that only looks good because of who came after him.
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
Muckler had the best line in hockey

2/3rds of which he didn't acquire, and 1/3 of which he arguably acquired at the cost of a better & younger player, in a way that estranged our best defenceman (Chara) when he did Hossa super-dirty by signing-trading him without Hossa's knowledge about the "trade" part of that deal.

the best skating team in hockey

None of which he acquired.

the best goalie

Who bailed on the team so badly none of the players wanted him back.

the best defence

Almost none of which he acquired

an elite coach

Sure. I'll give you this one. The first one so far on this list.

and a full stadium

Due to the successes of a team he almost unanimously had nothing to do with building.


... I mean, if you got named CEO of Apple Computers tomorrow, you don't get to take credit for inventing the iPhone. Someone did that before you got there. Just because the company is successful during your tenure, it doesn't mean you were the one that built the foundation for that success.
 

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,714
6,803
2/3rds of which he didn't acquire, and 1/3 of which he arguably acquired at the cost of a better & younger player, in a way that estranged our best defenceman (Chara) when he did Hossa super-dirty by signing-trading him without Hossa's knowledge about the "trade" part of that deal.



None of which he acquired.



Who bailed on the team so badly none of the players wanted him back.



Almost none of which he acquired



Sure. I'll give you this one. The first one so far on this list.



Due to the successes of a team he almost unanimously had nothing to do with building.


... I mean, if you got named CEO of Apple Computers tomorrow, you don't get to take credit for inventing the iPhone. Someone did that before you got there. Just because the company is successful during your tenure, it doesn't mean you were the one that built the foundation for that success.

If I was named CEO of Apple and the company tanked, that’s Murray’s story. If I was named CEO of Apple and all the shareholders were happy, that’s Mucklers story.

Again, Murray also inherited an elite team and couldn’t ever find a coach to guide it. And it collapsed.

Go back and look at the stats, they will tell the story
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
Again, Murray also inherited an elite team and couldn’t ever find a coach to guide it. And it collapsed.

Go back and look at the stats, they will tell the story

Murray inherited an aging contender at the end / on the other side of their cup window, with the worst farm system in the NHL and zero prospects of note.

Muckler inherited a young elite cup contender with a top-5 farm system and the cupboards absolutely full, and squandered it. I still don't know what he did that he deserves credit for here.

If I was named CEO of Apple and all the shareholders were happy, that’s Mucklers story.

So we're in agreement that Muckler did nothing at all, and enjoyed credit he didn't truly earn?

Because you didn't really rebuke my point here. You simply are agreeing in a roundabout way, or at least that's what this seems like. I can only go by what is written... You might be implying something else? If I'm off on this one and you meant something else though, I'm open to hearing about it.
 

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,714
6,803
Murray inherited an aging contender at the end / on the other side of their cup window, with the worst farm system in the NHL and zero prospects of note.

Muckler inherited a young elite cup contender with a top-5 farm system and the cupboards absolutely full, and squandered it. I still don't know what he did that he deserves credit for here.



So we're in agreement that Muckler did nothing at all, and enjoyed credit he didn't truly earn?

Because you didn't really rebuke my point here. You simply are agreeing in a roundabout way, or at least that's what this seems like. I can only go by what is written... You might be implying something else? If I'm off on this one and you meant something else though, I'm open to hearing about it.

I don’t need to rebuke anything, look at the standings
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
I don’t need to rebuke anything, look at the standings

I'm trying to explain to you that Muckler had nearly nothing to do with assembling the team that put up those standings. Saying "look at the standings" in response to that claim doesn't address any of the criticisms.

I mean... I'm fine if this is your main point. It means we don't have to continue the debate, since you've done nothing so far to refute my position in it.
 

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,714
6,803
I'm trying to explain to you that Muckler had nearly nothing to do with assembling the team that put up those standings. Saying "look at the standings" in response to that claim doesn't address any of the criticisms.

I mean... I'm fine if this is your main point. It means we don't have to continue the debate, since you've done nothing so far to refute my position in it.

Your explaining an opinion, I’m just basing it off of results. Your trying to contextualize something that can’t be, Muckler fired his coach, traded his starting goalie and #1 center, traded his top scorer - it’s not like he sat around doing nothing in the press box.

Muckler traded Hossa and a cap dump for heatley. Murray traded Heatley for a cap dump and nothing. Murray got nothing for Spezza, like literally nothing for a 1 point a game player and Captain.

This is a non debate - Muckler has elite coaches, Murray had Swiss league coaches.

Just look at the stats. Look at the crowds. It’s not even a debate - under Muckler star players wanted to be one ottawa, under Murray Mark Boroweiki wanted to be in ottawa.
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
Your explaining an opinion, I’m just basing it off of results. Your trying to contextualize something that can’t be, Muckler fired his coach, traded his starting goalie and #1 center, traded his top scorer - it’s not like he sat around doing nothing in the press box.

Muckler traded Hossa and a cap dump for heatley. Murray traded Heatley for a cap dump and nothing. Murray got nothing for Spezza, like literally nothing for a 1 point a game player and Captain.

This is a non debate - Muckler has elite coaches, Murray had Swiss league coaches.

Just look at the stats. Look at the crowds. It’s not even a debate - under Muckler star players wanted to be one ottawa, under Murray Mark Boroweiki wanted to be in ottawa.

I'm not trying to debate how good / bad Murray was. That's a debate you are free to pursue with others if that's your desire.

I'm trying to objectively define how bad Muckler was. Muckler.
 

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,714
6,803
I'm not trying to debate how good / bad Murray was. That's a debate you are free to pursue with others if that's your desire.

I'm trying to objectively define how bad Muckler was. Muckler.

Oh okay. You’re trying to say by hat our most successful GM in our history, the one who pretty much resided over all our most memorable headlines was horrible. Okay cool, good luck with that, history will just be like ‘Cup Finals, Pizza line, best season ticket and corporate base in Sens history, 50 in 07, best alumni by far in history.’

History is a tough one especially when it keeps stats and standings and attendance records
 

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
Oh okay. You’re trying to say by hat our most successful GM in our history

... Pierre Gauthier? The guy who is basically single-handedly responsible for turning a laughing-stock expansion team into a perennial powerhouse?

Oh wait, you're not talking about Gauthier. Ok, continue...

... the one who pretty much resided over all our most memorable headlines was horrible. Okay cool, good luck with that, history will just be like...

‘Cup Finals

With a team he largely had no hand in assembling. Gauthier and Johnson largely responsible.

Pizza line

2/3rds of which he had no hand in assembling ( one by Gauthier, the other by Randy Sexton in a rare stroke of good luck on his part), 1/3rd of which was acquired at the cost of a better player (drafted by Gauthier)

best season ticket and corporate base in Sens history

On the foundation of a team he had no real hand in assembling.

best alumni by far in history.’

None of which he is responsible for acquiring. Almost all were acquired by Gauthier and Johnston.

... Yep. That's exactly what I'm saying.

What is your counterargument? That the credit for the team that was almost entirely assembled by Marshall Johnston / Rick Dudley (a decent placeholder GM) / Pierre Gauthier should somehow be attributed to Muckler? Even Jaques Martin was a Pierre Gauthier hire, not Muckler. Muckler inherited the one coach that was responsible for like 90% of all Sens games played under his tenure.

That simply by virtue of BEING THERE, that Muckler should get to ride on the coat-tails of better men?

History is a tough one especially when it keeps stats and standings and attendance records

It sure is. Especially when you start to actually look at who was responsible for it.

Correlation does not equal causation. This is like... one of the guiding pinnacles of proper analysis.
 
Last edited:

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,276
3,689
Ottabot City
... Pierre Gauthier? The guy who is basically single-handedly responsible for turning a laughing-stock expansion team into a perennial powerhouse?

Oh wait, you're not talking about Gauthier. Ok, continue...





With a team he largely had no hand in assembling. Gauthier and Johnson largely responsible.



2/3rds of which he had no hand in assembling ( one by Gauthier, the other by Randy Sexton in a rare stroke of good luck on his part), 1/3rd of which was acquired at the cost of a better player (drafted by Gauthier)



On the foundation of a team he had no real hand in assembling.



None of which he is responsible for acquiring. Almost all were acquired by Gauthier and Johnston.

... Yep. That's exactly what I'm saying.

What is your counterargument? That the credit for the team that was almost entirely assembled by Marshall Johnston / Rick Dudley (a decent placeholder GM) / Pierre Gauthier should somehow be attributed to Muckler? Even Jaques Martin was a Pierre Gauthier hire, not Muckler. Muckler inherited the one coach that was responsible for like 90% of all Sens games played under his tenure.

That simply by virtue of BEING THERE, that Muckler should get to ride on the coat-tails of better men?



It sure is. Especially when you start to actually look at who was responsible for it.

Correlation does not equal causation. This is like... one of the guiding pinnacles of proper analysis.
Gauthier left the organization and had to be replaced. Muckler was brought in with a very limited budget and managed to keep us elite. Because of the cap he had to make tough desicions. What he did to hossa sucks but its a business. He did his job and ultimately missed out on Kopitar. Staal was never a game changer and neither were the draft picks he could have picked. Its almost like Murray's goal from day one was to become GM. The end of the season that Hasek was hurt he came out before Muckler and said he didn't see how Hasek could come back and it was better to move on. The very next interview Muckler wasn't opposed to bringing him back. Ultimately Murray was laying the foundation for a take over and probably undermind Muckler behind the scenes the following season.

I for one was shocked the following season after making the finals we fire the GM and replace the coach. That is where the slide began.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,703
9,650
Montreal, Canada
Don't know if it has been re-said, as I haven't read the whole thread and don't want to go into this argument for the millionth time, but the MAIN REASON Murray didn't have more success and was forced to rebuild in 2011 was the fact that Muckler had destroyed any kind of future for the Sens. Just look at the drafting record for CS and if you're a Sens fan and don't know by now that DRAFTING AND DEVELOPING IS THE KEY, I don't know what to tell you. Ottawa can't even attract free agents, or even extend their own talent, even though Murray miraculously signed Gonchar, MacArthur and Kovalev and kept most of the key players when they reached UFA. He was the one able o do that, now it's a very different story.

Thankfully, Murray took the reins in 2008 and started to draft good players again. It's a shame that not more success was achieved based on the foundation Murray built (Melnyk is mainly to blame here) but nonetheless, the elements were in place.
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
... Pierre Gauthier? The guy who is basically single-handedly responsible for turning a laughing-stock expansion team into a perennial powerhouse?

Oh wait, you're not talking about Gauthier. Ok, continue...





With a team he largely had no hand in assembling. Gauthier and Johnson largely responsible.



2/3rds of which he had no hand in assembling ( one by Gauthier, the other by Randy Sexton in a rare stroke of good luck on his part), 1/3rd of which was acquired at the cost of a better player (drafted by Gauthier)



On the foundation of a team he had no real hand in assembling.



None of which he is responsible for acquiring. Almost all were acquired by Gauthier and Johnston.

... Yep. That's exactly what I'm saying.

What is your counterargument? That the credit for the team that was almost entirely assembled by Marshall Johnston / Rick Dudley (a decent placeholder GM) / Pierre Gauthier should somehow be attributed to Muckler? Even Jaques Martin was a Pierre Gauthier hire, not Muckler. Muckler inherited the one coach that was responsible for like 90% of all Sens games played under his tenure.

That simply by virtue of BEING THERE, that Muckler should get to ride on the coat-tails of better men?



It sure is. Especially when you start to actually look at who was responsible for it.

Correlation does not equal causation. This is like... one of the guiding pinnacles of proper analysis.

Man, major kudos to you for trying, but you just got took for a ride. Dude never had/has any interest in debating hockey. They find find a point so obviously nonsensical that they know will irk people, and just repeat it over and over. A telltale sign is when they start saying things like "you're just giving your opinion, I'm stating facts" or "the truth/history is difficult to deal with" or "no need to get upset/sensitive/emotional about it". Things with no possible rhetorical place in a debate except to trigger an emotional response.
 

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,276
3,689
Ottabot City
Don't know if it has been re-said, as I haven't read the whole thread and don't want to go into this argument for the millionth time, but the MAIN REASON Murray didn't have more success and was forced to rebuild in 2011 was the fact that Muckler had destroyed any kind of future for the Sens. Just look at the drafting record for CS and if you're a Sens fan and don't know by now that DRAFTING AND DEVELOPING IS THE KEY, I don't know what to tell you. Ottawa can't even attract free agents, or even extend their own talent, even though Murray miraculously signed Gonchar, MacArthur and Kovalev and kept most of the key players when they reached UFA. He was the one able o do that, now it's a very different story.

Thankfully, Murray took the reins in 2008 and started to draft good players again. It's a shame that not more success was achieved based on the foundation Murray built (Melnyk is mainly to blame here) but nonetheless, the elements were in place.
Murray never proved to Melnyk he could build a solid team despite hiring a lot of coaches and poor drafting during the first retool. One year we we retooling the next trying to go for it. Trades were always lateral moves or made is good enough to miss out on higher draft picks. Muraays problem is he thought he could build a contender without high draft picks.
 

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,276
3,689
Ottabot City
Man, major kudos to you for trying, but you just got took for a ride. Dude never had/has any interest in debating hockey. They find find a point so obviously nonsensical that they know will irk people, and just repeat it over and over. A telltale sign is when they start saying things like "you're just giving your opinion, I'm stating facts" or "the truth/history is difficult to deal with" or "no need to get upset/sensitive/emotional about it". Things with no possible rhetorical place in a debate except to trigger an emotional response.
That is always an issue on both sides at some point. Somebody always knows more than you.
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
I'm not sure what you mean. There's no sides for these people, it is just whatever perspective will draw an emotional response and get people to engage.
 
Last edited:

BonkTastic

ಠ_ಠ
Nov 9, 2010
30,901
10,092
Parts Unknown
My top 3 Sens GMs are, in order:

1) Pierre Gauthier
2) Marshall Johnston

Those are the Tier 1 guys.

3) Rick Dudley. He basically didn't screw up in his limited time as GM, and was good at his job, so gets this spot by default based solely on who is in the rest of the list.

After them, there's a considerable gap.
#4 is probably Murray by default. Some good moves, some bad moves, drafted ok, his legacy significantly damaged by the coaching carousel.

#5 is probably... Muckler. I suppose. He didn't do much, but the next guy on the list is Dorion, so I guess I'll pick the guy who was ineffective and squandered a great team over the guy who dismantled it.

#6, Dorion. Comments above.

#7 is Sexton, #8 is Bridgeman, but they were so bad and had such small tenures that we can just lump them together.
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
My top 3 Sens GMs are, in order:

1) Pierre Gauthier
2) Marshall Johnston

Those are the Tier 1 guys.

3) Rick Dudley. He basically didn't screw up in his limited time as GM, and was good at his job, so gets this spot by default based solely on who is in the rest of the list.

After them, there's a considerable gap.
#4 is probably Murray by default. Some good moves, some bad moves, drafted ok, his legacy significantly damaged by the coaching carousel.

#5 is probably... Muckler. I suppose. He didn't do much, but the next guy on the list is Dorion, so I guess I'll pick the guy who was ineffective and squandered a great team over the guy who dismantled it.

#6, Dorion. Comments above.

#7 is Sexton, #8 is Bridgeman, but they were so bad and had such small tenures that we can just lump them together.

Based solely on what they did with Ottawa I'm assuming? In that case your list looks pretty much spot on. But the greatest GM the Sens ever had, based on their whole careers, was Murray... he just didn't do so great while with the Sens.
 

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,276
3,689
Ottabot City
I'm not sure what you mean. There's no sides for these people, it is just whatever perspective will draw an emotional response and get people to engage.
the fact that you are saying "these people" discredits their argument and makes you out to be right regardless of what the argument is. I take issue with people who use emotions to validate any discussion because merely disagreeing with them evokes a perceived attack.

Too many people nowadays are confrontational without merit because they think they are being challenged when in reality its the beginning of a conversation where there are different opinions.

I honestly don't take sports discussions seriously. Grilled cheese isn't better or worse than a fried egg sandwich. They are just different.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
15,988
9,554
the fact that you are saying "these people" discredits their argument and makes you out to be right regardless of what the argument is. I take issue with people who use emotions to validate any discussion because merely disagreeing with them evokes a perceived attack.

Too many people nowadays are confrontational without merit because they think they are being challenged when in reality its the beginning of a conversation where there are different opinions.

I honestly don't take sports discussions seriously. Grilled cheese isn't better or worse than a fried egg sandwich. They are just different.
A friend egg sandwich with cheese is better and different than a grilled cheese or a fried egg sandwich.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->