Saskatoon GM Lorne Molleken was unusually candid in today's Saskatoon Star-Phoenix about trying to land Brayden Schenn. GMs do not normally name opposing players that they are pursuing; in the NHL that is sometimes called tampering to speak that way about a player on another team. Of course, I think (as do you, I'm sure) that such tampering allegations are laughable, but the fact is that normally GMs don't name players they might be interested in acquiring. So this is an interesting development which perhaps adds some more fuel to the fire (not that it was needed) that the Blades are pursuing Schenn.
Another note on the Kamloops situation....was reading through some articles on the team lately, looking for the dreaded negative reporting that the team is so upset at Gregg Drinnan about. Specifically, looking for examples where Gregg criticized specific players. Didn't find any yet. Found these quotes though:
- He was especially critical of the play of the club's top line, which features Chase Schaber between Brendan Ranford, who leads the WHL with 25 goals, and Jordan DePape. "They're a line that is very productive and sometimes your productive line gets away from what the game plan was," Charron said. "I felt they could have been more consistent in terms of getting the puck in deep and they weren't."
- "...publicly criticizing goaltender Jeff Bosch and left-winger Brendan Ranford, who leads the WHL in goals and points, on Radio NL after a 3-2 loss to the Cougars in Prince George on Friday night, Charron has shown he no longer is prepared to be patient. "
And a parting shot this morning....wish I could take credit for this but I can't....
The Blazers are considering changing their theme song from "Taking Care Of Business" to "Home On The Range".
Where seldom is heard,
a discouraging word,
and the skies are not cloudy all day....
12 comments:
Alan,
What are your thoughts on this quote from Rod Pedersen's blog?
A very thought-provoking comment came into the blog this week from someone named "Anonymous". He asked what my stance would be if a close friend/colleague was in a similar scenario as Drinnan. I thought that was a stellar question. My immediate inclination was that I'd be outraged. But I'm not big on "what ifs" or hypothetical situations and the fact of the matter is none of my close friends/colleagues WOULD ever be barred by the team they cover.
- National media from coast-to-coast have come out in Drinnan's defense. I'd suggest they know very little of the situation.
Do you disagree?
My reaction would be that I don't have any problems with Rod Pedersen personally, but it's no secret that he and Gregg Drinnan don't get along. So it's hardly surprising which side of the story he has chosen. He is hardly in an objective position there.
To be fair, neither am I. I have a decade-long relationship with Gregg and consider him a friend. So my position on this issue is hardly without bias either.
Even being as unbiased as I possibly can though, it's a rather black and white issue here. The issue is not whether anyone likes Gregg personally. That is completely irrelevant to the issue and I suspect he could care less if any given person likes him or not. The issue is simply that the WHL has a media policy which requires teams to grant access, and that policy is not being followed.
All the folks who are saying Gregg deserves this because he's not a nice guy, yadda yadda yadda....you know what? I disagree with them on their impressions of him, but regardless, it's irrelevant. It really is. He is a reporter and thus entitled to access. Cut and dried.
And you know what? People who never criticize never have to worry about making enemies. Everyone in that business has to decide whether their goal is to make lots of friends or whether their goal is to report the story as they see it. You can rarely do both.
Alan,
With all due respect, how many days in the media have you worked?
You CAN do both. Most public figures are comfortable with people asking tough questions. They prepare for it and respect the journalists that do so and provide fair coverage.
Guy Charron is in his 60's. He's been around the hockey media for more than 40 years. Why suddenly is this an issue?
Gregg Drinnan is good and he knows it. He is not above rules of human decency. Have you seen the posts today on the WHL network 54 forum? Speaks a tonne about Drinnan's character.
Steven - I do not work in the media. I write this blog for fun only. I've never tried to portray anything differently there.
I hear what you are saying. But I think there is a difference between being professional and answering the tough questions because it's part of your job, and liking or being friends with the person asking the questions. These public figures usually stand out there and don't shy away from the tough questions, I agree. But you can't tell me that they all consider the questioner to be a friend and would have a beer with him/her after the cameras are turned off and the notebooks put away.
That is what I am saying - if you're going to speak your mind publicly, you're going to piss some people off. And some of those people are going to delight in dancing on your grave if they get the chance. That's what I mean when I say there are people who think Gregg deserves this simply because they don't think he's very nice. And I'm saying, whether people like him or not should not be the issue, but for some people it seems to be.
In regards to the Graham James thing, I actually don't 100% agree with Gregg on that. I get what he was saying - that the team should not handle the James situation by pretending he never existed. There should be reminders of James everywhere in minor hockey, to keep reminding people of what can happen when we're not vigilant about who works with kids. But I definitely don't think Graham James belongs in the Broncos hall of fame just because of the positive things he did (ie, building & coaching the M.C. team). The negatives far outweigh his positives.
If there is a way to mention his involvement with the team without actually honoring him with hall of fame status, then that's the way to go. But I don't know enough about how their hall of fame works to comment more specifically there.
I have now read a few reports from bloggers and journalists alike regarding Lorne Molleken saying he is going after Schenn. That is simply not the case. Nowhere can I find anything he says that makes that statement anything but supposition. In fact I would call it bad journalism. He responds to a question about acquiring Schenn by saying (this is from the Sakatoon Star Phoenix)
"We as a team are first overall in our league, with an opportunity to better ourselves," Molleken said. "There's a number of players out there for trade and we're going to explore all options. If we can land a player like Brayden Schenn, it would sure benefit our team and our organization."
Exactly where in that does it say "we are trying to get Brayden Schenn"?
Mark - I didn't mean to imply that Molleken said he was going after Schenn. He didn't. But he did mention Schenn by name and that is unusual; that was my point - that perhaps you can read something between the lines there.
Also, when he says he's interested in acquiring a player "like Schenn", well....how many of those are there in the league who are on the market? I think there's only one.
If you read between the lines of what he said, one obvious conclusion that can be drawn is that Schenn is a player he is very interested in.
Well Alan, If I went car shopping for something "like" a BMW, the only logical conclusion from that statement is that I don't, in fact, want the BMW.........
Guess we disagree on that interpretation then. If somebody told me they were going shopping for "something like a BMW", my interpretation would be "a BMW or something similar".
I suppose your strict literal interpretation would make sense to an English teacher though. :)
Give it up Mark. I, and most other logical people, would come to the same conclusion that Alan did. You sound like you're trying to pick a fight here. You've to too much time on your hands...
Alan, your quote:
If there is a way to mention his involvement with the team without actually honoring him with hall of fame status, then that's the way to go. But I don't know enough about how their hall of fame works to comment more specifically there.
Perhaps under the plaque in the rink in Swift honoring the 1989 there could be another plaque saying "Graham James, head coach, not in Hall of Fame for sodomizing players."
I know you want to back your buddy Drinnan, but you need to give your head a shake. He sympathized with the country's most notorious sexual predator. And people wonder why the Blazers don't want a guy like that around the team.
These recent Graham James developments have shown why people like Drinnan have to be held accountable for what they write and how powerful Gregg's opinion is.
He think Graham James was not treated fairly by the Broncos and some level headed people agree with that because Gregg wrote it.
With great power comes great responsibility. Gregg has demonstrated he can be irresponsible with his powerful opinion.
I have to side with the Blazers.
Blake
I can't believe how people are hanging on to something a guy wrote years ago. You know what? Freedom of speech. He can write it, you can disagree with it.
But to institute a ban against a writer just because you don't like what he writes is incredibly unprofessional.
Post a Comment