rypper
21-12-05 it's finally over.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,394
- 20,315
NHL players that came from the program while he was director of hockey operations.
The extent of his role in getting them there, if any at all, I don't know.
Last edited:
Confirmed with Link: Canucks promote Todd Harvey to Director of Amateur Scouting
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
NHL players that came from the program while he was director of hockey operations.
The extent of his role in getting them there, if any at all, I don't know.
Pastor Of Muppetz
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 26,184
- 16,070
“Jim has a tremendous scouting background and he and (assistant GM John Weisbrod) have been together before and built teams,” Brackett said. “What they’ve really done for us as a scouting staff has been to really outline what types of players we’re looking for, what we’re looking to build and really given us a sound direction when we’re out at games: what types of players we’d identify as ‘a Canuck.’ So that’s been the most refreshing part...Sportsnet,
How Benning is trying to reverse Canucks' poor draft history - Sportsnet.ca
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,876
- 9,557
i checked eric crawford's resume.
1999-2004 assistant coach canucks/moose
2005-2008 pro scout for canucks
2008 promoted to director of pro scouting by mike gillis
Eric Crawford
so to recap,
crawford
5 years assistant coaching of pros
3 years pro scouting
promoted to director of pro scouting
harvey
5 years assistant coaching of amateurs
3 years amateur scouting
1 year acting director of amateur scouting
promoted to director of amateur scouting
i can't wait to hear from certain posters on how these do not compare.
1999-2004 assistant coach canucks/moose
2005-2008 pro scout for canucks
2008 promoted to director of pro scouting by mike gillis
Eric Crawford
so to recap,
crawford
5 years assistant coaching of pros
3 years pro scouting
promoted to director of pro scouting
harvey
5 years assistant coaching of amateurs
3 years amateur scouting
1 year acting director of amateur scouting
promoted to director of amateur scouting
i can't wait to hear from certain posters on how these do not compare.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,876
- 9,557
also from brackett.
“Jim is out seeing games as well and we just had our amateur meetings last week and he’s a big part of the dialogue and encourages a healthy discussion about players. Giving us direction and being heavily involved in the process has been the biggest change (during my time with the club),”
I was thinking more along the lines of his "scouting work" which would be reflected in the guys the program brings in if he was involved.
The role of a Director of Hockey Operations appears to more of an administrative support role. Here's a past job posting from University of Denver. Quite a varied job description but doesn't appear to involve much scouting work.
rypper
21-12-05 it's finally over.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,394
- 20,315
I wish Jim would focus on the rest of his duties as a GM with the same focus and intensity that he focuses on scouting.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 15,929
- 14,836
Yes one of the weirdest things on this site is that people don't want to give credit to Benning for his work with the amateur scouting department. Makes it easy to define who is willing to make shit up to suit a narrative though
AwesomeInTheory
A Christmas miracle
- Aug 21, 2015
- 4,245
- 4,454
Clarification: Crawford had been a part of the Canucks organization since 1999, before being put into a scouting role six years after joining the organization before gradually seeing more responsibilities. His experience working for the team's AHL affiliate (ie, at the professional level) put him into a position where he was put in charge of pro scouting, where he served for 3 years before being promoted, when he was promoted to head of professional scouting, where he served in that role before being promoted again to director of player personnel.
I think it's important to distinguish that Crawford was working as a pro scout, not an amateur one, because it built on his background and experiences, same as it makes sense to highlight Harvey's minor hockey background. Also, he'd have a better understanding of the team's needs, structure and methodologies being a part of the organization, so his moving up makes sense.
Harvey, while his amateur coaching background is equivalent to Crawford, has seemingly had a rocket tied to his ass. He'd been scouting for 2 years before getting promoted into a "cross checker" role where he was overseeing other scouts and their opinions regarding things, and then getting promoted again to his current position 2 years later (or technically 1 year, and the Canucks only officially announced it just now.)
While it's possible for him to get brought up to speed in a rapid manner, Weisbrod's assessment of him ("he's a personable guy") and the fact that we don't really know what he may have been responsible for is concerning and what makes it feel like it's a rapid promotion.
Crawford was someone who grew within the Canucks system, developed and his promotion comes across as being more in-line and understandable, considering how the Canucks pro scouting was during his tenure and how they generally 'hit' more than they 'missed.'
Harvey coached amateur hockey for 4 years, got hired as an amateur scout and worked as one for 2 years before being promoted as a "cross checker" and then got promoted a year after that (before being 'officially' promoted 1 year after that.)
Crawford worked as a video coach for the Canucks for 3 years, then got shuffled off to the Moose as an assistant for another 3 years. He was then moved/(promoted?) to being a pro scout where he worked for 3 years. 9 years and still not in a position of meaningful authority before being promoted to a position of authority during the 9 year mark.
Do you disagree that Harvey hasn't seen a quick rise to the top?
Last edited:
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 15,929
- 14,836
Crawford had a poor scouting record and could be argued a nepotism hire
Harvey i have no idea about as a director but if anything would seem to be what you would want in a young guy that seems to be excelling and moving quickly through the ranks. I'm not gonna say he's a good hire as i have some doubts but i have yet to see a good argument here for why we should not be giving him the benefit of the doubt. The runs at his character and trying to throw shade because he's endorsed by Benning is kinda sad
Harvey i have no idea about as a director but if anything would seem to be what you would want in a young guy that seems to be excelling and moving quickly through the ranks. I'm not gonna say he's a good hire as i have some doubts but i have yet to see a good argument here for why we should not be giving him the benefit of the doubt. The runs at his character and trying to throw shade because he's endorsed by Benning is kinda sad
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,876
- 9,557
harvey has not had a quick rise to the top. he is 46, 9 years into a hockey after hockey career and nowhere near the top. he's just arrived at an entry level management position herding cats, and he spent years getting to it. eric crawford was 32 when he was promoted to director of pro scouting.
i notice harvey's 12 year nhl pro career does not even merit a mention by you as relevant "background and experience", while you sing the praises of crawford's experience as a video coach when he was 22-24 years working for his brother. i mean if pro experience does not count for hockey management you should be outraged about the sedins hire surely? in your mind, steve yzerman's hiring as a team vice precedent right out of hockey must be appalling.
what a crock.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,876
- 9,557
his main promotions came after marc was gone.
and, as i mentioned before, i am not sure being a great amateur scout is a necessary skill for managing amateur scouts.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 15,929
- 14,836
He was still hired by the Canucks when Marc was the coach. It's not a big deal as i really don't care if the guy can do a good job and i'm not certain how much it affected anything
@krutovsdonut, there is a huge difference between two to three years experience for amateur scouting and professional scouting.
You just have to use your brain, it’s not hard.
I would have thought it was obvious to everyone that more years of experience would be required in order to effectively evaluate an amateur scout rather than a professional scout. It would seem to me that 2-3 years is not a long enough period of time for evaluation since many players (perhaps most) don’t crack the NHL until their draft plus three or four seasons? And that’s for his first year. So ya, I think 2-3 years of amateur scouting experience on a resume isn’t enough to accurately assess the applicants abilities.
The same generally can’t be said for professional scouting. For example, a year after the Miller acquisition, it was pretty clearly a big win for the scout(s) who recommended him. Similarly, an acquisition like Gudbranson was obviously a poor one within a year of acquiring.
Honestly, this stuff really isn’t rocket science and I don’t have the time to explain stuff like this to you.
You just have to use your brain, it’s not hard.
I would have thought it was obvious to everyone that more years of experience would be required in order to effectively evaluate an amateur scout rather than a professional scout. It would seem to me that 2-3 years is not a long enough period of time for evaluation since many players (perhaps most) don’t crack the NHL until their draft plus three or four seasons? And that’s for his first year. So ya, I think 2-3 years of amateur scouting experience on a resume isn’t enough to accurately assess the applicants abilities.
The same generally can’t be said for professional scouting. For example, a year after the Miller acquisition, it was pretty clearly a big win for the scout(s) who recommended him. Similarly, an acquisition like Gudbranson was obviously a poor one within a year of acquiring.
Honestly, this stuff really isn’t rocket science and I don’t have the time to explain stuff like this to you.
AwesomeInTheory
A Christmas miracle
- Aug 21, 2015
- 4,245
- 4,454
This is the first time that Crawford's age has come up. I remember when we started by bringing up Kris Draper as a comparable, now this.
Silly me, operating within the parameters of your own chosen criteria, which was coaching/scouting experience.
How is stating what his role was equate to "singing his praises"?
Are we just running down every single player who works in a front office role?
Like it or not, certain individuals are given a certain cachet. Yzerman would certainly be one of them, as would the Sedins. Ditto for Wayne Gretzky effectively jumping straight to the role of head coach. This is a reality in virtually every business and sometimes it works (Yzerman) and sometimes it doesn't (Gretzky.)
Does pro experience 'count' for something? Probably, sure. But this is the first time that this has been brought up in the discussion.
Does being an individual who excelled at the very highest level (awards, Cups, medals, etc.) afford you some credibility that might not be given to someone who hasn't played at a high level or reached similar heights?
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,876
- 9,557
pro tip. massively increasing the ratio of patronizing comments to sentences containing actual content does not make your "argument" better. it just makes it fair comment for me to put the word argument in quotes when describing the utter garbage you just posted.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,876
- 9,557
it might have affected some things.
based on title and history, eric crawford was potentially the most influential guy at the table when benning made all his initial trades and ufa signings.
and we still have lou onboard, who eric and gillis hired. so the chain of nepotism is unbroken.
Kind of ironic coming from you. But anyway, are you just ignore the obviously valid point I raised. Did your memory fail you again?
It's highly unusual for a Director of Pro Scouting to be put into the position of running a team's amateur draft. Eric Crawford is the only guy I can think of that has done that. Certainly, it doesn't make sense for one man to run both the Pro and Amateur scouting department given the demands of (at least) the amateur scouting position.
I do agree with you that this is a rapid rise for Harvey given that he has no obvious connections with the Canucks. Certainly he's no Tyler Wright who went from player, to 4 years of being a development coach, to the Director of Amateur Scouting position.
Interestingly, another former head scout turned GM has had his fair share of changes in the Director of Scouting position over in Columbus.
AwesomeInTheory
A Christmas miracle
- Aug 21, 2015
- 4,245
- 4,454
Not to be nitpicking, but wasn't he director of player personnel at that point? Although, yes, from my understanding it's unusual for a pro scout to crossover like that, so to speak.
Yeah, it's more the point that he's coming from outside of the organization that is concerning for me. Maybe he is a sponge and has absorbed a ton of information and has a really good head for organizational needs and what Benning expects/is looking for in the job. If I were paying close attention to the Canucks back when Eric Crawford was first hired, I'd probably be just as skeptical of him.
It's also entirely possible that he's just someone who is willing to do what Weisbrod/Benning want in a performative/perfunctory role, while Weisbrod/Benning get to do all the 'heavy lifting' or whatever.
I'd like to know more about what scouting insights he has or something.
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,150
- 5,471
So when people are promoted from within it's nepotism, and when they're hired from outside the organization they won't have enough information. When they're promoted quickly they're too inexperienced. We haven't covered what it means when they're promoted too slowly, anyone is welcome to chime in on it if they like. I hope it's not bad.
As Director of Amateur Scouting, Brackett reported to AGM Weisbrod. I am assuming Harvey will also report to Weisbrod. I do not consider this a senior management position so why are shorts getting knotted over his resume? Posters that complain about the OBC now complain about hires that are not OBC. I don't mind this hire, just like I didn't mind the Gillis hire.
Agreed...then he'd elevate those roles from the current "tire fire" to the same "hit or miss" level of his drafting.
Bandy, that was never even my argument though. In fact, I literally stated the opposite and acknowledged that the hire could be good. My point was that based on his resume this seems like a shitty hire. Of course he could turn out to be a great hire.
The difference is immaterial though. He effectively took over after three years, and its pretty obvious that three years isn’t a long enough period to evaluate whether any of his recommendations were any good. Especially with the latter two drafts. I’m surprised this is something that is even contended on this forum where the mere mention of a prospect busting is almost always met with outrage that it’s too soon to determine that.
I think he was officially promoted to Director of Player Personnel in 13-14 which would be one year after he took over the running of the draft. Regardless, Director of Player Personnel typically have directors of scouting reporting to him. They don't officially run both the pro scouting and amateur scouting. I don't believe there were any other "directors" at the time he was the Director of Player Personnel.
Well Brackett originally came from outside of the organization as well. I don't think coming from outside of the organization should be a concern at all. In fact, I would be more concerned if it was the opposite.
I think Benning and Weisbrod clearly wants to have a guy who is willing to take directions and Brackett wanted more and more say. This may sound bad, but if we are to believe the reports that the autonomy that Brackett was seeking had nothing to do with the creation of the draft list then we should be able to rest easy. If you go back to when Brackett was first promoted to the Director position, he spoke of how the group of scouts were intact and had the same guys who are head of the areas and regions. At that point in time Weisbrod was very involved so we shouldn't assume that he's suddenly taking a bigger role.
With that said, I think Brackett is a smart guy who like you said did have a more extensive background in amateur scouting. He seems to have his own ideas and opinion on players and isn't afraid to speak up and disagree with another scout's take on a player. I do worry that Harvey doesn't have that in him. Ultimately, I do think that the Director of Amateur Scouting's role is mostly that of a facilitator but I think having a good evaluator at the helm can make a huge difference. I do think Brackett is a talent scout and talent evaluator. I worry that our USHL scouting would not be the same without him. Curiously, we've looked to Europe a lot in the past 2 drafts.
