Having worked with too many managers and c-level folks, I don't think having management skills that are "still developing" is a slight. Those whose management skills are still developing vs those whose management skills have fully developed is the difference between highly successful, modern managers with higher degrees of emotional intelligence and managers who are actively being avoided, moved out of their roles, and left behind.
Yes, but the Venn Diagram of those 'highly successful, modern managers with higher degrees of emotional intelligence', and people who dismiss entire generations of people out of hand, tend to not have a great deal of overlap.
Anyway, let's get back to the topic at hand.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
It was concerning to read about Huberdeau's comments, his lack of "points" , when he has never won anything. In the playoffs it is about total team commitment. Scoring and points come within that structure. My concern is what if some players tune out the next friendly coach in favor of scoring goals and collecting points.
Thing is Huberdeau didn’t “tune out” Sutter. He did what he was asked
The offensive system was high volume, low probability and they got burned
The defensive system was good at shot suppression but imo they had costly egregious breakdowns leading to too many grade As
Most teams play a more effective offensive system
Few teams play a more stifling defensive system, but it demands excellence and attention to detail
Boston didn’t have high PDO because they were “lucky”. They had high PDO because they were above average both offensively and defensively
I am not concerned about the team tuning out the new coach. I just hope the new coach has them above average in both o and d
And geez, the guy went from 2nd in the league to pretty pedestrian. Why wouldn’t he comment on why he thinks it happened?
We watched the hockey. It was boring and ineffective. He’s a passer. They were 31st in o zone passes.
I’d be concerned if he *didn’t* understand what the problem was, not that he said it out loud
Last edited by DeluxeMoustache; 05-04-2023 at 04:16 PM.
The Following 23 Users Say Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
Thing is Huberdeau didn’t “tune out” Sutter. He did what he was asked
The offensive system was high volume, low probability and they got burned
The defensive system was good at shot suppression but imo they had costly egregious breakdowns leading to too many grade As
Most teams play a more effective offensive system
Few teams play a more stifling defensive system, but it demands excellence and attention to detail
Boston didn’t have high PDO because they were “lucky”. They had high PDO because they were above average both offensively and defensively
I am not concerned about the team tuning out the new coach. I just hope the new coach
And geez, the guy went from 2nd in the league to pretty pedestrian. Why wouldn’t he comment on why he thinks it happened?
We watched the hockey. It was boring and ineffective. He’s a passer. They were 31st in o zone passes.
That's the thing - so many fans keep trying to claim Huberdeau quit on the team. The truth is the opposite - he did exactly what Sutter asked him to do. And even when it wasn't working, he kept doing it. All year. And he never complained.
The fact that he spoke up, after the season was over, in an exit interview, where speaking up is the desired outcome, does not make him a quitter.
The Following 61 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
At the professional level, all of the major companies in my sector are run or managed by Millennials or Gen Z-ers. Boomers have already been phased out and it is incredible how out of touch one seems in a management setting when you come across one.
As many people have said here, millennials in particular, are highly educated and generally more democratic. The "I have more experience" or "I have high expectations" card just doesn't play very well anymore. It's almost ridiculous to hear that from a Baby Boomer who can't even save a Word doc to a pdf.
Speaking personally, as a Millennial at a fairly senior-level position, my stance with management and people that I manage is to meet me halfway and then we can figure out how to go from there. It is far more beneficial and productive to spend a bit of time figuring out how different types of people work and integrating that style into a process or product.
Funny that you say that as a "younger" Baby Boomer analyst, I regularly spend time helping out other Baby Boomers, Millenials and GenZ with new technology so I don't think it has anything to do with generations but just your background, neighborhood, IQ, your nature, schooling, parents, etc
As for the experience stuff, when I was younger, I did not understand it fully but boy oh boy do I do now! It has more to do with seeing the evolution of things that work or don't work in your sector of activity.
To be used as a warning or advice to the younger members of the group who make decisions.
Conclusion: Healthy communication goes a long way.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Always Earned Never Given For This Useful Post:
That's the thing - so many fans keep trying to claim Huberdeau quit on the team. The truth is the opposite - he did exactly what Sutter asked him to do. And even when it wasn't working, he kept doing it. All year. And he never complained.
The fact that he spoke up, after the season was over, in an exit interview, where speaking up is the desired outcome, does not make him a quitter.
As I mentioned in another thread, in the last 5 do or die games, he was a +6 including +2 vs Wpg and Nsh.
He also was a great mentor for Pelts during the first 2 weeks when he was brought up, during his play and then another couple of weeks when he sat.
Get a coach who loves attacking the middle and does not mind east west hockey in the o-zone and Huby will find the trailer for great scoring chances.
Raz, BigZ, Weegs and Hanifin will need to be on their toes!
The Following User Says Thank You to Always Earned Never Given For This Useful Post:
Funny that you say that as a "younger" Baby Boomer analyst, I regularly spend time helping out other Baby Boomers, Millenials and GenZ with new technology so I don't think it has anything to do with generations but just your background, neighborhood, IQ, your nature, schooling, parents, etc
As for the experience stuff, when I was younger, I did not understand it fully but boy oh boy do I do now! It has more to do with seeing the evolution of things that work or don't work in your sector of activity.
To be used as a warning or advice to the younger members of the group who make decisions.
Conclusion: Healthy communication goes a long way.
Yeah, it should not be taken for granted that younger people are better with tech. Everybody goes through a learning process that requires exposure and experience regardless of age.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
Some of you sound like you'll be happier if the Flames miss the playoffs again next year so you can say "SEE, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T CRUSH ALL DISSENT AND ENFORCE A HIERARCHY OF FEAR!!!!!"
There's nothing wrong with being demanding, setting expectations, and rewarding good work. Belittling people, refusing to explain your decisions, non-merit-based favouritism, and Machiavellian mind games ARE wrong, though, even if they get results, and doubly wrong if they don't, which they are unlikely to do in an environment where your underlings are not easily replaceable commodities and rather highly skilled specialists from a severely limited labour pool.
I think some are offering different points of view, however who are the people supporting the "Belittling people, refusing to explain your decisions, non-merit-based favouritism, and Machiavellian mind games ARE wrong,"?
Though some posters want a coach who can lead the team and not coddle to players I doubt there is anyone who supports, mind games and belittling of players etc.
Lets try not to generalize, but you do make an excellent point about unacceptable behaviour.
Last edited by DazzlinDino; 05-04-2023 at 02:56 PM.
This fits with what I have seem. The younger generations are getting older now, at the company I work for many are now in management positions. And honestly they are doing an great job.
Their management style is much more based on inspiration than ordering. They empathize and understand what motivates their team members. Their teams are highly motivated and work together as a cohesive unit to hit their deadlines. This happens because they build an environment where their team members care about ewch other on a personal level, and go the extra kilometer because of it. Work from home goes smoothly for them too because of this.
It is the old school "do what I say because I am the boss" managers are the ones in trouble. The younger generations just do not respond to that style. And workplace changes like work from home broke a lot of their ability to force their will onto their team. Their teams do not work together and help each other out, they act like a group of individuals who only care about their assigned tasks and metrics.
Old styled management was often punishment based, but a lot of new companies are using a positive enforcement model where they give people to the tools to succeed. For example how does a child feel after they have been punished for not brushing their teeth, they feel deflated and bad inside; But if you tell a child, " if you brush your teeth I will read you a story" the child feels empowered. The Flames need to adopt new models of encouraging players to achieve higher goals within the team structure, whether is is by winning seven game segmants or achieving goals that have been outlined. In other words the Flames need to adapt and not regress.
This is all quite true, but it has been true for a long time. 20 years ago, the terrible bosses were saying "do what I say because I am the boss". The good ones inspired through other means.
Perhaps the newer generations will understand this better, but I suspect you will still have those "dinosaur" managers, even if Millenial or Gen Z.
Yes, it absolutely is a grey area, with younger people tending to be better at it than older people, but nothing absolute.
Some of it is just how our brains work as we age. Humans tend to get more stuck in our ways as we get older. And we are rarely self aware enough to realize when we become the problem.
But there is a larger trend too. I would agrue that this has been going on (in the west) since the middle ages. Nobility and feudalism was peak "do as I say or else" management style. Since then we have been slowly breaking those power structures, moving towards a more egalitarian culture. But not a straight line either, as the many dictatorships around the world and even the current nonsense in Florida show, some people are attracted to strong man "do as I say or else" leadership.
The genrational name calling is silly and pointless. But nothing too out of the ordinary. People find trite slogans easier to express than getting into the actual complexity of what is happening.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bandwagon Surfer For This Useful Post:
For those saying that Huberdeau never complained, how do you know this? Are you only referring to comments to the media? Or am I missing some reliable reporting that is out there.
What i have read is that a lot of players were complaining during the season and it was a fractured dressing room.
Thing is Huberdeau didn’t “tune out” Sutter. He did what he was asked
The offensive system was high volume, low probability and they got burned
The defensive system was good at shot suppression but imo they had costly egregious breakdowns leading to too many grade As
Most teams play a more effective offensive system
Few teams play a more stifling defensive system, but it demands excellence and attention to detail
Boston didn’t have high PDO because they were “lucky”. They had high PDO because they were above average both offensively and defensively
I am not concerned about the team tuning out the new coach. I just hope the new coach
And geez, the guy went from 2nd in the league to pretty pedestrian. Why wouldn’t he comment on why he thinks it happened?
We watched the hockey. It was boring and ineffective. He’s a passer. They were 31st in o zone passes.
I’d be concerned if he *didn’t* understand what the problem was, not that he said it out loud
Fairpoints, I never said he was a quitter and I never said he didn't do what the coach asked. That wasn't my concern. Sometimes hockey players think they need to be scoring points but whats important is the team work and defensive play. I don't disagree with anything you've said. It's just that as a player coming from Florida Panthers who put up a lot of points, he wouldnt be familar with a different style of play that focuses on the defensive side of the game.
Fairpoints, I never said he was a quitter and I never said he didn't do what the coach asked. That wasn't my concern. Sometimes hockey players think they need to be scoring points but whats important is the team work and defensive play. I don't disagree with anything you've said. It's just that as a player coming from Florida Panthers who put up a lot of points, he wouldnt be familar with a different style of play that focuses on the defensive side of the game.
Hoping for the best of both worlds. He has seen and played in a solid defensive structure now
I don’t think Sutter’s defensive strategy necessitated his offensive strategy by any means
The Following User Says Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
from my perspective at the time.. didn't understand the bridge deal. However Bennett was a penalty machine here and that one was a little bit different. Welp.. way she goes
Last edited by calumniate; 05-04-2023 at 04:30 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to calumniate For This Useful Post:
from my perspective at the time.. didn't understand the bridge deal. However Bennett was a penalty machine here and that one was a little bit different. Welp.. way she goes
This fits with what I have seem. The younger generations are getting older now, at the company I work for many are now in management positions. And honestly they are doing an great job.
Their management style is much more based on inspiration than ordering. They empathize and understand what motivates their team members. Their teams are highly motivated and work together as a cohesive unit to hit their deadlines. This happens because they build an environment where their team members care about ewch other on a personal level, and go the extra kilometer because of it. Work from home goes smoothly for them too because of this.
It is the old school "do what I say because I am the boss" managers are the ones in trouble. The younger generations just do not respond to that style. And workplace changes like work from home broke a lot of their ability to force their will onto their team. Their teams do not work together and help each other out, they act like a group of individuals who only care about their assigned tasks and metrics.
I am sorry but this is insane to me. First, I am not sure which side of the argument I am supposed to be on being in my early 40's but I have spent the past 20 years being managed by many Boomers who managed in that "new style" you seem to credit with the new generations. I have never met a single manager who was a do what I say because I am manager.
Seems like a lot of millenials here wanting to credit themselves and their peers for being great managers by making BS generalizations about "boomers" that aren't really true at all.
Perhaps all this does is out me as an out of touch "Boomer" but I am not sure why experience and knowledge are bad things while just having a pulse and #### for brains means you should get an equal spot at the table.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Spurs For This Useful Post:
Some random internet guy with definitely not 20/20 hindsight and not really that good
The whole point of it is being a know it all dick about Frolik
(Cool that he calls Scorp out as a legitimate source. But in 2019, I don’t think Scorp was on the beat yet. Correct me if I’m wrong.)
Look, in 2018-19, the 3M line thing was a beast.
Frolik had 16-18-34 in 68 GP, with zero PP points
The Flames had just finished first in the West.
Killer 1-2 punch with 13-23-28 and the 3 M line
Is it really unreasonable that given the cap squeeze, Tkachuk was actually fine with the bridge deal?
Like I say, I viewed it as a deal in good faith by Tre.
Kept the band together, gave Tkachuk a hefty raise in $ today with a guaranteed QO of 9
Lots of contracts are structured with escalating $
Certainly a mistake in hindsight but understandable given the situation
No reason to put on our 20 ?? hindsight glasses and label Frolik as hot garbage
When they decided 28 was centre, that changed a lot
Anyways, pretty weak stuff imo
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
Thing is Huberdeau didn’t “tune out” Sutter. He did what he was asked
The offensive system was high volume, low probability and they got burned
The defensive system was good at shot suppression but imo they had costly egregious breakdowns leading to too many grade As
Most teams play a more effective offensive system
Few teams play a more stifling defensive system, but it demands excellence and attention to detail
Boston didn’t have high PDO because they were “lucky”. They had high PDO because they were above average both offensively and defensively
I am not concerned about the team tuning out the new coach. I just hope the new coach has them above average in both o and d
And geez, the guy went from 2nd in the league to pretty pedestrian. Why wouldn’t he comment on why he thinks it happened?
We watched the hockey. It was boring and ineffective. He’s a passer. They were 31st in o zone passes.
I’d be concerned if he *didn’t* understand what the problem was, not that he said it out loud
Sutter's system of high pressure forecheck and aggressive man defence was ideally suited to a young, fast team with a goaltender who could maintain focus in a low event game and bail the team out when the system had a breakdown leading to an odd-man rush. Unfortunately:
1. He elected to use older, slower players when the system demands young, fast players with high endurance, and continued to rely on those older, slower players in critical situations in which it was necessary to score quickly or to prevent the other team from scoring a goal late in the game,
2. His #1 goaltender seemed distracted most of the time during his wife's pregnancy, and this distractibility was greatly exacerbated by that goaltender playing in a very low event system,
3. His fastest skater and the player best able to get back into the play in an odd man rush situation was suddenly and unexpectedly out for the entire season,
4. The PP (and later in the year to some extent the PK) and the OT setup were completely predictable and lacked creativity due to a strict adherence to a set protocol. Once opposition teams got a bit of film of the system, they were easily able to cheat on the system, always knowing the Flames' next move in advance, which of course also led to many odd-man rushes,
5. Opposition teams increasingly brought in younger, faster players who were able to circumvent the system and create odd-man rushes by simply skating around the pylons Sutter chose to put on the ice, and
6. The NHL continued to kowtow to the Oilers and greatly increase the number of iffy penalty calls in order to make McPP look even more exciting. Unfortunately, the tight-checking system designed by Sutter resulted in many situations in which what would not previously have been a penalty, such as bodychecking, now resulted in the team being shorthanded. As a result, in spite of dominating possession in 90+% of the games, sometimes by a large margin, the Flames were also on the short end of the stick in power play opportunities in 90+% of the games.
Unfortunately, Sutter's unapologetic rigidity led to his downfall. His system could never have worked with the team he was given to coach, it was even worse with the players he trusted the most and gave unearned ice time to based solely on previous experience, and it had no chance of succeeding in a league that is much younger, faster, more skilled, and more tightly officiated than when he led the Kings to the Cup. And on top of that, his disrespect toward young and skilled players lost him the room.
Sutter was a great coach in his heyday, but that time has passed him by. I doubt we will see him coach in the NHL again. The incoming coach will probably need to throw last year out the window and start a new assessment of each player from scratch, because Sutter was absolutely unable to utilize the unique skills of each player on his team, and the toxic environment he introduced into the room made it hard for the team to feel like they were actually a team all rowing in the same direction.
The Following User Says Thank You to Macindoc For This Useful Post:
