Jason Bonsignore interview

[Tw0Shoes]

I wouldn't describe it as 'silly'. It just seems odd its been so long between happening and ending up talking about it... finally.

Honestly, I can see why you feel that way since it was so long ago that he was part of the oilers, but he's only been out of hockey for a couple of years now. Why would he be reflecting on his time before his career was over? Also in the pre-amble it says that Gene came to talk to him about it prior:

"Ya, you know, part of the reason I agreed to come on today is because Gene had spoken with me last year and he seemed to sincerely appreciate my story and had some interest in it. "

It's not like this is souray seeking out spector to throw mgmt under the bus so that he can get traded.
As for comparing him to messier, and saying that mess had what it took, and dealt with Sather's ****, 2 things:
-Doesn't make it right.
-while Jason obviously lost and for sure he is to blame, the Oilers were the big losers. Taking a sink or swim approach is not getting the most out of a 4th overall draft pick if he hasn't learned to swim.

ps. Gene's non-bust comment was terrible.

 

[Everest]

Honestly, I can see why you feel that way since it was so long ago that he was part of the oilers, but he's only been out of hockey for a couple of years now. Why would he be reflecting on his time before his career was over? Also in the pre-amble it says that Gene came to talk to him about it prior:

"Ya, you know, part of the reason I agreed to come on today is because Gene had spoken with me last year and he seemed to sincerely appreciate my story and had some interest in it. "

It's not like this is souray seeking out spector to throw mgmt under the bus so that he can get traded.
As for comparing him to messier, and saying that mess had what it took, and dealt with Sather's ****, 2 things:
-Doesn't make it right.
-while Jason obviously lost and for sure he is to blame, the Oilers were the big losers. Taking a sink or swim approach is not getting the most out of a 4th overall draft pick if he hasn't learned to swim.

ps. Gene's non-bust comment was terrible.

Fair enough.

The Oilers win/loss record reflected Slats' poor developmental/drafting philosophy for years after he took his talent to NYR.

 

[trent_vinyl]

Of the players you listed, it is not as though they were all that great after leaving the oilers. Devereaux actually had his best season, point-wise, with the oil. A whopping 27 pts.

Cleary wasn't drafted by us. The Hawks traded him to us. He was given a lot of chances in his 3 seasons with the oil. His first season after being traded to the Wings, he only put up 15pts in 77 games. It wasn't until after that that he began doing something, and even then only a 40 pt players. This was a case of a player taking years to mature and figure out his game. No blame on the Oil here.

Hecht we traded with the Blues for. Had an Ok season with us, 40 pts, but he has always been a player you expect so much more from because it looks like he has all the tools. Again, it's not like he's done anything spectacular since leaving the oil.

Find some better examples.

I disagree, its not like nobody was going to draft Steve Kelly or Jason in the first round, these two would of gone to some other team most likely shortly after had we not drafted them.

Why is it that so many players from left the oilers and became better players elsewhere?

Boyd Devereux
Dan Cleary
Jochen Hecht

off the top of my head.

and why is it, that almost 90% of the players bring here suck? What player has come here and actually met or exceeded expectations after being brought here.

Edmonton has had the worst development for players i've ever seen.

 

[trent_vinyl]

And the guys you've mentioned have sure excelled with other NHL teams since leaving the OIl

Yea thats totally what I was saying in my post...

Player's Edmonton brought in recently who sucked/didnt come close to expectations.

O'sullivan
Lupul
Penner(Last season notwithstanding)
Foster
Comrie
Cogs and gags and Nilson nose diving since their rookie season.
Smid's inability to get any better.

I could go on here, face it our development program sucks. Had it not been for the last couple of draft picks this organization would be going nowhere.

 

[Reimer]

For those that can't listen to it at work you can read it at the link below.

http://www.kuklaskorner.com/index.p..._i_feel_like_i_let_everyone_in_edmonton_down/

Thanks BBO.

 

[joestevens29]

I agree. But its better late than never.

Slats' had a dark side. He was (at times) arrogant, beyond shrewd and bullish. Not many Oiler fans talk about it...but...its true.

I think he's maybe mellowed in his silvering years...but...he was not a terrific character fit for quite a few players/people & prospects he got involved with.

Meh those were as I would call them sissy boys.

The fact still remains that Sather with the help of a bunch of young players led this team to many years of glory. When you are a part of developing such players as Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Lowe, Moog, Huddy, Anderson, Beukeboom, Tikannen etc.. it doesn't really matter that you ruined others amongst the way.

 

[trent_vinyl]

Ok, i just listened to the interview and i have to say that Principe saying "We will have a 1st round NON-bust Grant Fuhr coming up" is one of the most unprofessional things that i ever heard especially after Bonsignore gave a sincere interview. For shame Gene.

Big deal. That's nothing, and actually somewhat funny. He's a bust, there's no question about it and to give an interview where he doesn't really stand-up and accept it, he should be labeled as that.

 

[Everest]

Meh those were as I would call them sissy boys.

The fact still remains that Sather with the help of a bunch of young players led this team to many years of glory. When you are a part of developing such players as Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Lowe, Moog, Huddy, Anderson, Beukeboom, Tikannen etc.. it doesn't really matter that you ruined others amongst the way.

Unless your one of the players he ruined.

 

[hockeyaddict101]

Meh those were as I would call them sissy boys.

The fact still remains that Sather with the help of a bunch of young players led this team to many years of glory. When you are a part of developing such players as Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Lowe, Moog, Huddy, Anderson, Beukeboom, Tikannen etc.. it doesn't really matter that you ruined others amongst the way.

That is ridiculous. So basically Sather gets the credit for the good players and any player that didn't make it he ruined.

Rather simplistic don't you think?

 

[copperandblue]

Unless your one of the players he ruined.

Because it's not like the NHL is known for offering second and third chances or anything.

 

[Tw0Shoes]

Meh those were as I would call them sissy boys.

The fact still remains that Sather with the help of a bunch of young players led this team to many years of glory. When you are a part of developing such players as Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Lowe, Moog, Huddy, Anderson, Beukeboom, Tikannen etc.. it doesn't really matter that you ruined others amongst the way.

There is no way that they could have developed in spite of Sather? What exactly did he do to develop gretzky? Looks more like he got a few good young players and rode them to a 20+ year career with the oilers and another decade+ with the rags. You can't say that he developed them when they're already firing on all cylinders when he got them. Would you say he developed Arnott?

 

[joestevens29]

That is ridiculous. So basically Sather gets the credit for the good players and any player that didn't make it he ruined.

Rather simplistic don't you think?

So he should've been able to develop all those players?

 

[joestevens29]

There is no way that they could have developed in spite of Sather? What exactly did he do to develop gretzky? Looks more like he got a few good young players and rode them to a 20+ year career with the oilers and another decade+ with the rags. You can't say that he developed them when they're already firing on all cylinders when he got them. Would you say he developed Arnott?

Just like there is no way you can say that Bonsignore didn't develop because of Slats.

 

[Tw0Shoes]

So he should've been able to develop all those players?

Should have been able to develop one of

1982 - 20 Playfair, Jim
1984 - 21 Odelein, Selmar
1985 - 20 Metcalfe, Scott
1986 - 21 Issel, Kim
1987 - 21 Soberlak, Peter
1988 - 19 Leroux, Francois
1989 - 15 Soules, Jason
1990 - 17 Allison, Scott
1991 - 12 Wright, Tyler
1992 - 13 Hulbig, Joe
1993 - 16 Stajduhar, Nick
1994 - 4 Bonsignore, Jason
1995 - 6 Kelly, Steve
1996 - 6 Devereaux, Boyd
1997 - 14 Riesen, Michel
1998 - 13 Henrich, Michael
1999 - 13 Rita, Jani

4 1st round draft picks turned out from 1982-2000. Ruchinsky & Arnott were lucky to get out. I'm gonna have to say Beukeboom & Smyth were a fluke.

Since joining the Rags:
10 Dan Blackburn(was a really good goalie - I used to play against him - burned out real quick, familiar story with Slats)
12 Hugh Jessiman
6 Al Montoya
19 Lauri Korpikoski - became a decent player once he got away from Sather
12 Marc Staal - Good player
21 Bob Sanguinetti
17 Alexei Cherepanov
20 Michael Del Zotto

2009 - 2011 to early to tell, none of them have played a game yet.

With a track record like that, I don't think you can say that Slats was great for development.

 

[hmminvisiblecola1279]

Its amazing to me to read the comments about a guy who has been out of the league for many years(he was a bust, get over it) and a man(Slats) who as well has not been a part of this organization for many years. Seriously guys, fighting over two people who don't have any relevance in regards to this team. Please oh please training camp can't come soon enough.
Bonsignore I must say you earned your fifteen minutes of fame.

 

[copperandblue]

Should have been able to develop one of

1982 - 20 Playfair, Jim
1984 - 21 Odelein, Selmar
1985 - 20 Metcalfe, Scott
1986 - 21 Issel, Kim
1987 - 21 Soberlak, Peter
1988 - 19 Leroux, Francois
1989 - 15 Soules, Jason
1990 - 17 Allison, Scott
1991 - 12 Wright, Tyler
1992 - 13 Hulbig, Joe
1993 - 16 Stajduhar, Nick
1994 - 4 Bonsignore, Jason
1995 - 6 Kelly, Steve
1996 - 6 Devereaux, Boyd
1997 - 14 Riesen, Michel
1998 - 13 Henrich, Michael
1999 - 13 Rita, Jani

4 1st round draft picks turned out from 1982-2000. Ruchinsky & Arnott were lucky to get out. I'm gonna have to say Beukeboom & Smyth were a fluke.

Since joining the Rags:
10 Dan Blackburn(was a really good goalie - I used to play against him - burned out real quick, familiar story with Slats)
12 Hugh Jessiman
6 Al Montoya
19 Lauri Korpikoski - became a decent player once he got away from Sather
12 Marc Staal - Good player
21 Bob Sanguinetti
17 Alexei Cherepanov
20 Michael Del Zotto

2009 - 2011 to early to tell, none of them have played a game yet.

With a track record like that, I don't think you can say that Slats was great for development.

It looks to me like you are confusing Slat's poor drafting Slat's ability to develop.

And Blackburn didn't burn out, you may want to dig deeper into that one...despite attributing it to a "familiar story" with Sather prospects.

Talk about blindly flailing away....

 

[hockeyaddict101]

So he should've been able to develop all those players?

It isn't that simple.

If you employed a person that had previous problems would you suddenly be responsible for them turning it around and their development as a person and if they didn't turn out it would be all your fault because you ruined them?

By the same token if you employed a person that had a stellar reputation would you suddenly be responsible for their success and could take the credit for it?

In both cases you may have little to do with their success or their failure. In could be possible that you had some responsibility but the chances of you being a major contributer to the success or failure is negligible. Sather did not make Gretzky a great hockey player or a great individual. He may have been a factor in his success but ultimately the success belonged to Gretzky

Bonsignore had a terrible reputation for not working hard, not being in shape, having a 10 cent heart long before Sather ever drafted him so it is very simplistic and frankly very wrong to say that Sather ruined him. Was he a factor? Possibly but ultimately the failure belonged to Bonsignore.

 

[joestevens29]

It isn't that simple.

If you employed a person that had previous problems would you suddenly be responsible for them turning it around and their development as a person and if they didn't turn out it would be all your fault because you ruined them?

By the same token if you employed a person that had a stellar reputation would you suddenly be responsible for their success and could take the credit for it?

In both cases you may have little to do with their success or their failure. In could be possible that you had some responsibility but the chances of you being a major contributer to the success or failure is negligible. Sather did not make Gretzky a great hockey player or a great individual. He may have been a factor in his success but ultimately the success belonged to Gretzky

Bonsignore had a terrible reputation for not working hard, not being in shape, having a 10 cent heart long before Sather ever drafted him so it is very simplistic and frankly very wrong to say that Sather ruined him. Was he a factor? Possibly but ultimately the failure belonged to Bonsignore.

I agree for the most part. I just think it's ridiculous to blame Sather for a guy that did absolutely nothing elsewhere.

 

[hockeyaddict101]

I agree for the most part. I just think it's ridiculous to blame Sather for a guy that did absolutely nothing elsewhere.

Yep and reading the interview again gives you an insight.

He really was very specific about how Sather screwed up but only one sentence about his responsibility and "I could have done things differently". He goes on about how he was the rookie of the month in Tampa. So what happened after that? Who derailed your career in Tampa? Which person screwed you? Why did the organization go in a different direction?

Be specific what could have you done differently Jason? Where were you at fault? The fact that he was so specific about where he felt everyone else was wrong and so non-specific about how he could have been at fault really sums everything up.

This is a person that hasn't learned the basic fact that NO ONE else is responsible for your success or your failure.

 

[Tw0Shoes]

It looks to me like you are confusing Slat's poor drafting Slat's ability to develop.

And Blackburn didn't burn out, you may want to dig deeper into that one...despite attributing it to a "familiar story" with Sather prospects.

Talk about blindly flailing away....

He did burn out when Richter went down with a concussion. They played the hell out of him, until he burned out and then they picked up another goalie. Then he suffered nerve damage at training camp the next season.

As for the other ********:
It seems like earlier you were confusing Slat's ability to develop with a few good draft picks that made it inspite of him..
Talk about blindly flailing away....

 

[copperandblue]

He did burn out when Richter went down with a concussion. They played the hell out of him, until he burned out and then they picked up another goalie. Then he suffered nerve damage at training camp the next season.

Oh yeah I stand corrected, I forgot that nerve damage is a common symptom of burnout.

Good lord.

As for the other ********:
It seems like earlier you were confusing Slat's ability to develop with a few good draft picks that made it inspite of him..
Talk about blindly flailing away....

Actually I didn't credit Slat's with anything, you may want to take another glance over what I wrote.

I was pointing out that character in a player does count, in the example I used one player oozed character and went on to a hall of fame career despite what games he was exposed to while the other was character deficient and didn't make it past the first turn.

Slat's wasn't the one that built up the character, he was the one the exposed whether or not there was any.

 

[McBooya42]

It isn't that simple.

If you employed a person that had previous problems would you suddenly be responsible for them turning it around and their development as a person and if they didn't turn out it would be all your fault because you ruined them?

By the same token if you employed a person that had a stellar reputation would you suddenly be responsible for their success and could take the credit for it?

In both cases you may have little to do with their success or their failure. In could be possible that you had some responsibility but the chances of you being a major contributer to the success or failure is negligible. Sather did not make Gretzky a great hockey player or a great individual. He may have been a factor in his success but ultimately the success belonged to Gretzky

Bonsignore had a terrible reputation for not working hard, not being in shape, having a 10 cent heart long before Sather ever drafted him so it is very simplistic and frankly very wrong to say that Sather ruined him. Was he a factor? Possibly but ultimately the failure belonged to Bonsignore.

You sir, get the prize for post of the day IMO.

To the point, and full of truth.

 

[oilersrule14]

Bonsignore had a terrible reputation for not working hard, not being in shape, having a 10 cent heart long before Sather ever drafted him so it is very simplistic and frankly very wrong to say that Sather ruined him. Was he a factor? Possibly but ultimately the failure belonged to Bonsignore.

When I was listening to Bonsignoire talk about being the 2nd leading goal scorer in Hamilton and still being scratched, I thought that was very curious. Why do you scratch your 2nd leading goal scorer?

So I looked at the Bulldogs stats that year, and ta-da guess who was dead last on the Bulldogs for plus/minus? Made even more impressive by the fact that he was their second leading scorer, that's a lot of minuses. (I know plus/minus isn't always telling, but I didn't see him play in Hamilton and judging by the scouting reports on him combined with the stat, It's probably a safe assumption defensive play/backchecking/work ethic had a lot to do with why he was being scratched)

So maybe as Bonsignoire said, Sather was vague, blunt, and rude about why he was being scratched...and perhaps that was a factor in Bonsignoire not responding and improving his game....but ultimately the onus was on Bonsignoire to recognize his own flaws (which does not seem like it should have been too hard) and improve on them.

 

[mrzael]

It isn't that simple.

If you employed a person that had previous problems would you suddenly be responsible for them turning it around and their development as a person and if they didn't turn out it would be all your fault because you ruined them?

By the same token if you employed a person that had a stellar reputation would you suddenly be responsible for their success and could take the credit for it?

In both cases you may have little to do with their success or their failure. In could be possible that you had some responsibility but the chances of you being a major contributer to the success or failure is negligible. Sather did not make Gretzky a great hockey player or a great individual. He may have been a factor in his success but ultimately the success belonged to Gretzky

Bonsignore had a terrible reputation for not working hard, not being in shape, having a 10 cent heart long before Sather ever drafted him so it is very simplistic and frankly very wrong to say that Sather ruined him. Was he a factor? Possibly but ultimately the failure belonged to Bonsignore.

Very good points, I agree. I just think more could have been done to help him. I admit I only see from outside but in generations gone by there certainly were the expectations of being tough and being a man however, not everyone matures to manhood at the same rate.

I've often wondered in past years about this old school mentality of dealing with athletes, more specifically with 18/19 year old kids, the same way. Not everyone needs to be prodded or kicking their butts to succeed, some need a finer touch or praise or what ever. These few people are world class athletes and it is worth the extra effort for their sakes and the teams to help them progress.

The effort that now goes into the young kids I believe is a welcome change.

 

[thadd]

Did you listen to the interview? He says in it that he's sure that the organization is great now and that they bring guys along differently now. It's extremely obvious he's exclusively talking about the organization in his day only, and not talking about Lowe or Tambellini at all.

I don't have time to listen to some neverwas to go on about what should've been but wasn't because of how he was miss treated. If he wasn't there to throw the current Oilers regime under the bus then I don't see what the point was in him doing the interview.