Indicting a Ham Sandwich
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Feb 10, 2011 1:30 PM PST
in Armchair GM
Email
PrintARTHUR:
In law school, I was exposed to various iterations of the aphorism that "a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich." Most often, I heard the phrase with the prosecutor removed i.e. "[Regarding grand juries], if you get the right 16 people together, you can indict a ham sandwich."
Blogospheres calling out General Managers are so often an example of this idea. When I express disappointment in Bob Murray, or even support of the rise of David McNab, it is so often based on quotes I did not gather, situations much deeper than what was reported and transactions whose negotiations are not always colored with the emotions of the fan base.
I am not an insider, so I understand how it is, at the very least, inappropriate for me to act as a person who culls information from published articles in the press to present a case for or against an individual. That is, at best, the rationalization of a torch-toting mob's demand for redress of grievances, and the raison d'être with which most mainstream news sources paint blogs, while hoping to discredit them.
There was no significant blogosphere the last time Bob Murray was a General Manager. But that mattered very little in the ultimate estimation of his failures; he was crucified by the mainstream media as effectively as any blogger could eviscerate him today.
I'm not a regular reader of the Chicago Tribune, nor was I twelve years ago, when Bob Murray regularly haunted its pages, but I have to wonder when it became okay for insiders to call him out. Was it the 15 trades in one season? Was it missing the playoffs again, with no signs of a return? Was it the trade of Chelios, where Murray was probably just a triggerman, but the defenseman found the situation with his General Manager rather personal? Was it the signing, waiving and buyout of Wendel Clark, where Murray called out the legend (and, by extension, the general manager's own mistake in signing Clark as a free agent) after only 13 games?
Before there were bloggers, it was, at some point, 'okay' to question the competence of a General Manager without evoking the 'insider versus outsider' debate. And you can argue that the press themselves are outsiders, but on page 2 of that above-linked Tribune article, a definitive insider in Murray's situation, Bob Pulford, made sure to distance himself from Murray's actions.
Ten years later, most would hope-- you figure Murray, at the very least, hoped --that memories would fade. But memories can be refreshed.
During his press interviews after signing with the Maple Leafs, François Beauchemin was very vocal about waiting by a phone that never rang and how returning to the Ducks was his preferred option. Posturing, you could argue, as many did about an emotional Chelios. That notwithstanding, Murray admitted it. He reasoned that he didn't want to insult Beauchemin, a player the General Manager had fought to get while playing wingman to Brian Burke, and that the blueliner was operating in a price range outside of the Ducks' wheelhouse. So . . . no offer was made.
The desire to stay is as crippling a weakness as one can find in a free agency negotiation, and Beauchemin claims he had it. An insulting offer, had it been made, might have opened negotiations. But even if a 3.8M average was absolutely necessary to make him stay, you have to ask yourself what that money was saved to achieve. For all the Salary cap problems, Bob Murray did ultimately spend money on his blueline. What did he get?
Some combination of James Wisniewski and Steve Eminger or Nick Boynton-- the host of nickel and dime defensive question marks that came in to play Randy Carlyle's system and have since exited with little fanfare, most of them losing their jobs to Sheldon Brookbank?
He traded a player of certainty for two or more players of uncertainty. Then he had to trade (literally) to get him back.
Beauchemin doesn't seem to bear a grudge over the situation, showing understanding and implying all's forgiven. So maybe bygones should be bygones, and I should let this ham sandwich go on its way. The mistake was corrected after all, just like Whitney being traded for Visnovsky (if you conveniently forget that Eric Tangradi is good at hockey and that there was a period of time when the team actually had to rely on Ryan Whitney).
I guess I have a problem with stamping "WOOPS" on an entire season, or every game between the preseason and trading deadline. And I guess that's the same problem they had in Chicago. Too many deals, too many attempts to overhaul the team every year, only to get it right, if at all, when it was too late.
Maybe Murray's lucky this time out. No one's seemed to notice so far. A budget team in a small market offers too many excuses and not enough microscopes to produce well-publicized mistakes or beat writers terribly interested in eviscerating the General Manager of a hockey team. And if a blogger does it, well, he's a blogger. He, and anyone who joins 'Spartacus,' will probably be indicting a ham sandwich next week, so who cares what they have to say?
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Small markets
It’s interesting, but I never realized how closely connected the Crunch and the Ducks are, market-wise. What you described—the excuses, the lack of microscopes and publicity—sound very similar to what we deal with here. Sadly, the Crunch could pull out of town and pretty much the only people who would care are whatever season ticket holders the team’ll have left after this season. We have one beat writer who may or may not do his job well, depending on who you talk to. We have a great radio announcer in Jason Lockhart and Brent Axe, a local guy who hosts a sports program for ESPN Sports Radio, does his best to give the Crunch some love a few times a week. But that’s really about it.
Syracuse University owns this town, and has always owned this town. Our game stories are generally buried beneath four pages of analysis of SU’s latest win,loss, or acquisition, whether in football or basketball. Your average game goer wouldn’t have much of a problem finding something to do instead of hockey. The War Memorial’s capacity of under 6,000 doesn’t help us, but I don’t know if it would change much even if the place sat 10,000.
It’s an interesting thing to share. Sometimes Crunch fans are really frustrated by the lack of coverage or publicity, whether it be about our troubles or triumphs. I think that’s why some blogs spring up. We’re trying to fill in a hole. Sometimes fans listen to us, sometimes they don’t, but at the end of the day we can only hope we shot something out into the world that grabbed someone’s attention who might not have cared about the team before.
I tend to be a bit of a Murray apologist.
By saying that, I of course concede that his actions require frequent apologies. Murray has made, and will continue to make mistakes; I don’t see a reprieve coming anytime soon on that front. Despite the numerous shortcomings, there are two ways that he has earned some credit with me:
1.) I feel that Bob Murray has done an excellent job in the last several years with the draft. While I know that there are many people that work under him that have scouted players, made recommendations and drawn up draft boards, when all is said and done Murray is the one on the line for it all. I don’t pretend to think that Murray is some kind of omnipotent draft demigod, but he has delegated duties to smart and capable people and shown very above average results because of it.
2.) He’s able to admit when he makes a mistake. It might not be in the form of a press release saying exactly that, but it usually comes in the form of a Boynton trade, an Eminger trade, a Voros release, or something like that. He hasn’t saddled us with any cumbersome contracts (other than Giggy, maybe) and when he finally figures out that a player is just not working here, he gets them off the roster somehow.
"I looked down and saw my shaft in his hands."- b-_ryan9
Murray hasn’t really negotiated many difficult contracts. In fact, Bobby Ryan and Toni Lydman are the only significant contracts he’s handled. He balked both times he played chicken with Wisnieski. Other than that he gives generous deals to Boyntons in order to avoid making tough decisions. At the end of the day, and I’m building off of what Arthur said in the Lupul post yesterday, Murray can’t negotiate a deal with a top end free agent. The Ducks should make a serious run at Brooks Laich this this summer, like 3 years 11 million serious, but Murray won’t get in the fight. He doesn’t leave us with bad contracts because he doesn’t take the risk on the players who get those deals. Does anyone think Hamhuis isn’t worht the money he’s getting?
As to the draft, I don’t disagree with you, but I think that’s something Murray could still be in control of as an Assistant GM. I said it in that Lupul post too, being able to identify talent is not a sufficient condition for a GM. Murray should be fired. If you look at everything he’s wasted to build this team, then it becomes apparent the man has done more harm than good.
Again, this is me apologizing.
But I think the fact that Murray hasn’t really negotiated many difficult contracts is something that has worked to our (if not hit) advantage. Yeah, he totally blew the Beauchemin contract thing. Totally blew it.
I feel like every time a hockey player with a huge, inflated contract takes to the ice and upderperforms, the GM that inked that contract should be ashamed of himself. Of all of the big contract guys on the Ducks, the only one Murray signed that isn’t living up to his contract is Sutton. He has managed to dump every other one and avoid some huge pitfalls.
"I looked down and saw my shaft in his hands."- b-_ryan9
by Floyd Gondoli on Feb 11, 2011 11:28 AM PST up reply actions
No risk, no reward. Murray is in a deadly cycle. He won’t take the risk on a big name player, that means he has to trade for one. He can’t negotiate a good trade, so he has to overpay. Essentially, he’s going to have to raid the cabinet to acquire impact players. His best chance at survival is to ride the RPG gravy train as far as it will carry him. In the mean time, he’ll probably gut the cupboard, because he’s too afraid or uncoordinated to pursue quality talent.
Let’s face it, the guy doesn’t know what he’s doing. If he gets Penner at the deadline we might as well have Burke running us and the Leafs. A guy who acts as rashly as Murray is going to miss more than he hits. A GM with a plan will at least make moves with direction. Murray is just scrambling, trying to get his hands on everything he can. This is why he can’t be successful in a large market where people know the sport, they know to call him on his bullshit. Meanwhile, the OC Register toes the corporate line.
Murray
He tries to do the right things for the right reasons, it is the technique that lacks. His role model was Burke. Burke does things his own way (being kind), and is approaching Sather territory, I am glad he didn’t wait until nobody was left to try to get someone, like last summer.
Well i say fire Murray. A GM with good intentions that fails as a GM, is a GM that builds a bad team with good intentions. Bottom line is if Murray can’t negotiate the contracts that will make this franchise a stanley cup contender and is only willing to send the good prospects he does draft to overpay for players for half seasons then all he is doing is hurting the ducks.
MMMmmmm
I would like to indict the hell out of a ham sandwich right now! Especially if it is made thick smoked hickory ham steak with some dijon mustard and a little mayo. The trial in my stomach would be quick and painless.
"Skillet, we just spent $64,000 in that bar. So we're gonna have to get jobs to cover up the fact that we rob banks" -Mouse Fitzgerald
Seems to me you guys wont stop griping about Bob and Randy no matter what. Nobodys perfect, just live with it. The Ducks are still a very exciting team and organization to follow. So much that I will tune in tonight at 0430am to watch them play against the Flames. Yes, Bob has made some trades that didnt work out. Yes, one can argue about his negotiation skills, etc… This said, the Ducks are still the organization players want to play for. The contracts he signs are prudent and you cannot blame him for being indecisive or lazy. The Ducks are around top 10 in the dollars per point ranking. This team can go far if they manage to reduce shots against.
I won’t stop griping about Bob, because he needs to be fired. He’s been detrimental to our organization. How much damage is too much damage? Tangradi, O’Dell, and now Gardiner. All guys we won’t be able to do anything with because murray shipped them off in bad trades. He hasn’t signed anyone to a good contract. As I said above, he’s inherited most of his good contracts, his contracts are Bobby Ryan, Jonas Hiller and Toni Lydman, all of whom make more or even money at the end of the deal. That means they’ll be harder than move.
I can appreciate your passive attitude, but the Ducks aren’t an organization teams WANT to play for. There’s no proof of that anywhere. The free agents we get are either guys who want to play with Selanne or who played here under Burke and want to come back. This reminds me of politics. We pat politicians on the back for fixing mistakes they made in the first place, even if the band aid isn’t enough to stop the gushing wound.
Muuray / Carlyle
I kind of agree a bit with Riko above… And I always think you should only go and fire someone if the better solution is already known and in the waiting. Anyhow, I do think Carlyle and Murray are different stories:
- with Carlyle I am peronally amazed how he turned around this team over the season. Things just did not seem to click at the beginning and granted the Ducks got lots of help from Hiller who faced almost 100 more shots than anyone else till he was “injured”, but I get the feeling that the team is now in a positon where they can beat anyone on a good night and I did not have that feeling at the beginning of the season. And plus, who would replce him?
- Murray on the other hand I do think deserves to be let go at the end of this season. I think he is doing an admirable job of trying to fix his own mistakes now and might even turn things around in his deparment if he now goes after Kariya for the stretch run (please do!), but at the end of this season if the Ducks did not, by some miracle, make the stanley cup finals, I think they need to look for a more capable man. This is Teemu s last season and everyone has been saying it s about winning now. Well then you need to put together a team that ends up in the finals, otherwise you could have rebuilt earlier. And the Beauchemin trade (while making the Ducks stronger now) is the reason that I think anytging below the finals is a cause to fire Murray. There just is no apparent strategy in what he does. he seems to be jumping from one idea to the next. Most importantly there is no way to argue for sanity if you do not approach a free agent who wanted to stay and then give up a solid winger (who shold have yielded beauchemin alone) AND a strong prospect AND draft picks. Just no way this makes you look like a guy that other GMs wont try to force into overpaying next time… But again: who would succeed him? I am not close enough to the Ducks (from Europe) to judge if McNab can do it. Who else should and why? Plus I think the time to let murray go is the offseason, not now.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
CK Photo Galleries
