Bryan Murray's Tenure As GM

Written by Nichols

Friday, 31 October 2008 10:43

If you're a knowledgeable and well-read Sens fan, odds are you're not satisfied by the coverage of the team in the local rags and spend endless amounts of time scouring the Web for the latest pieces of news. Consequently, you've probably noticed some recent discontent amongst the fans concerning this team's current state of affairs. With a slow 4-5-1 start to the season, some fans are ready to throw GM Bryan Murray under the same bus that Hartsburg threw Gerber under. Why? Good question. For some fans, they're taking the MLSE approach. For this guy, it's playoffs or bust.

I'm doing my best Jacques Martin imitation when I say that there's "No Doubt" that Murray has made some unfortunate mistakes. That being said, the point of this piece is to simply enlighten people as to why he's done far more good than harm in the short time that he's been here.

Coaching:

On June 18th, 2007, Murray took over a team coming fresh off of a trip to the Stanley Cup Finals. With his ascension to the GM position, his first order of business was to appoint a new Head Coach to fill the Head Coach vacancy. Rather than bring in an outside candidate, Murray hired from within and brought in John Paddock. Due to the historical lack of success shared by teams that promote Assistants, many felt that such a move would result in a precedented failure.

Consider the most recent example being the Calgary Flames: After reaching the Stanley Cup Finals in 2004, the Calgary Flames promoted Jim Playfair to their Head Coach position. Following a 96-point campaign, the Flames were bounced out of the First Round of the Playoffs and Playfair was made a scapegoat for a season that was deemed a failure by Darryl Sutter.

While many allude to the Playfair era in Calgary, it was different from the 2007-2008 Ottawa scenario. Here's my breakdown:

1) Ottawa was a team fresh off a Stanley Cup Final, not a team two years removed. Why bring in an outside voice who may deviate from a strategy that worked so well from the previous year?

2) Since we're on the subject of precedents, it's important to note that historically, teams that go to the Stanley Cup Finals often regress the next season anyways. An appointment from within essentially bought Murray time to tune the team before turning the team over to an outside opinion whom the players would have no choice but to listen to. Paddock was a prime candidate for becoming a scapegoat.

3) Paddock's midseason firing served as an opportunity for Murray to take over behind the bench in an attempt to awaken the team from their lull.

Obviously the third thing never happened, but it's tough to win a playoff series against the eventual Eastern Conference Champions when you've got injuries to key players like Fisher, Alfredsson and Stillman. It's even tougher when your starting goaltender is a sieve named Martin Gerber.

Based off of last season's experiences, many fans were clamoring for a Coach who could come in here and demand accountability. It's still a little early, but based off of Hartsburg's words and actions thus far, he's definitely a stark contrast to the Paddock Era. And hey, for the first time in years, we have a Coach without a lisp. BONUS. No more snickering players during pep talks.

Goaltending:

It doesn't take an expert to point out that the Sens goaltending situation has been a mess during the Murray era. Is that Bryan's fault? Do you blame the guy who's been here for slightly over a year or do you blame his predecessors who have failed during the previous 15 years (Read as: John Muckler for failing to acquire Luongo and overpaying Gerber)? It's no secret that Murray has tried to acquire a goalie: At last season's deadline, he creatively offered Chicago a straight up swap of goalies - Lalime & Bulin for Emery & Gerbs. Maybe the Blackhawks would have bitten if Gerber and Emery weren't overpaid underachievers.

Speaking of Emery. His contract looks bad in hindsight because Murray gave guaranteed money to a guy riddled with character issues. To play devil's advocate, he also locked up a young goalie who was fresh off a trip to the Stanley Cup Finals. Sure, at the time, Emery was troubled and his value might never have been higher and rumors are that Murray could have parlayed Ray into a decent player or two. But signing him wasn't an unreasonable thing to do. Does it suck that he gambled by investing a ton of faith into Emery's continued growth as a person? Yes, but those are the breaks. If you're going to shit on Murray for gambling on a young goalie that took the Sens to the Cup, then you have to give Murray credit for including Emery's affordable buyout clause as an insurance policy.

Defence:

The other point of contention is that under Murray, the Sens have gone from having one of the best defences to having one of the worst. Since the Stanley Cup season, the Senators have lost Wade Redden, Tom Preissing, Joe Corvo and Andrej Meszaros and all we have to show for it are Alexandre Picard, Filip Kuba and San Jose's 1st rounder in the 2009 NHL Entry Draft.

First thing's first, Wade Redden's contract is a Johnnie Mucks debacle. Forget the fact that the team chose Redden over Chara - which is ridiculous in itself. Let's focus on the fact that we gave Redden, who at the time was 28 or 29, a 2 year contract. If you were going to lock up a defenceman of that pedigree, usually you'd want to sign that said defenceman up for the long haul? Better yet, compound the term of the contract by giving Wade a full NTC. Not only did he walk away after two years, but he left without any compensation. That's not to say that Murray didn't try though. To the public's knowledge, he made at least two separate attempts.

Of course, Bryan could have gone Cliff Fletcher on him and forced him out a la McCabe. But Redden was a fixture in the community who bought a box for sick children. Note to Spezza: If you want to improve your public appeal, less Jubillee Jewelers commercials and more boxes for sick kids.

Losing Tom Preissing via unrestricted free agency was a genuine kick in the nuts. Not because he was talented, but because it left us with nothing to show for Muckler's Martin Havlat deal. Sans Preissing, all that's left from losing a point-per-game performer is Josh Hennessey and Patrick Wiercoch (an '08 Murray draft pick who apparently is performing quite well at the University of Denver).

Joe Corvo was a 5th defenceman on the team last year who wanted out because he was consumed with what the local papers were writing about him. Losing Joe was difficult because after his departure the Sens had trouble moving the puck or working the point on the Power Play but that's as much a reflection of Meszaros and Redden's inefficiency as it is of Joe. While Stillman and Commodore both left via UFA, Murray refused to overpay for their abilities. Losing Eaves was unfortunate, but it's not like this team isn't already saddled with third line players.

The loss of Andrej Meszaros is difficult to analyze because it's such a recent transaction. From this early standpoint - due to Picard's early issues - it appears as though the only point of contention is whether or not Murray should have insisted upon Tampa's 1st rounder rather than insisting on the inclusion of Picard. I don't know if you can really blame Murray for this though because:

1) No one knew how good Tampa Bay was going to be. Many prognosticators had them competing for a playoff position.
2) There's an inherent pressure from the fans and management to compete for a playoff spot now. By taking Picard and SJ's pick, you're indicating that you want to compete now rather than later.

Frankly, the only thing I'm a bit critical of has been the coaching staff and management's insistence on using Luke Richardson ahead of Schubert as the team's 6th defenceman. I think you can lend some of the blame on Paddock for this as he relied upon the veteran more when his job security was in question. In hindsight, when the season was going down the tubes last season, I wish the Sens had given more opportunity to groom Schubert for his expanded role on the blueline this year. It's like we just wasted a year of his development last season.

Trades:

Bryan Murray has only made a handful of deals thus far:

1) Peter Schaeffer for Shean Donovan - Schaeffer out of NHL because of salary.
2) A 6th Round Pick for Martin Lapointe - meh
3) Joe Corvo and Eaves for Mike Commodore and Cory Stillman - took a chance to shake up the club down the stretch without touching his core players.
4) Lawrence Nycholat for Ryan Shannon - meh
5) Andrej Meszaros for SJ's 1st rounder, Filip Kuba and Alexandre Picard - too early

And here are his signings/extensions:

1) Randy Robitaille - Let go Saprykin (Muckler guy) and signed Robitaille? Meh...
2) Jesse Winchester - solid board guy...give us some offence already!
3) Brendan Bell - depth fodder on D
4) Jarkko Ruutu - Awesome and affordably priced
5) Jason Smith - May be marginally overpriced but whatever.
6) Dany Heatley - Two time 50 Goal Scorer
7) Jason Spezza - NTC before 2010
8) Mike Fisher - Overpaid and with a NTC? Balls...
9) Chris Kelly - 3rd liner
10) Shean Donovan - 600k, produces despite lack of ice time
11) 'Toine - On a good contract but needs to produce
12) Alex Auld - Big goalie who isn't Ray. Enough said.
13) Daniel Alfredsson lifetime contract at a reasonable price.

Outside of the Saprykin vs Robitaille choice and the Mike Fisher contract, there's not a lot here to shit on. Even shitting on Fisher's contract is a bit too much. It's not like the Sens are the only team in the League that's not overpaying a player. Similarly, it's not the money being given to Fisher is outlandish. He's overpriced by what? $750k to $1 million? I know, I know, we could have two Randy Robitaille's for that money!

There are many fans who are disappointed that Murray hasn't splurged on a big named Free Agent to address a need - ie. Brian Campbell. I find it hypocritical that people chastize a bad contract in Fisher but wouldn't mind seeing a guy like Brian Campbell earn ridiculous amounts of jack. Within two years, fans would be shitting all over the cost and length of a that kind of deal. It's cap management and Murray has slowly been ridding the roster of Muckler personnel while bringing in cost effective players that can create some payroll flexibility to retool when the time is necessary.

Draft Picks:

It's a little early to evaluate Murray's draft picks because the majority of them are still in Junior. The lone exception however is Zack Smith, a third rounder from this past season, who leads the Baby Sens in goals with 5 in 7 games. It's somewhat interesting because a Murray 3rd round pick is already having a greater impact than the majority of Muckler's picks.

2008:

1st(15th): Erik Karlsson
2nd(42nd): Patrick Wiercoch
3rd(79th): Zack Smith
4th(109th): Andre Petersson
4th(119th): Derek Grant
5th(139th): Mark Borowiecki
7th(199th): Emil Sandin

2007:

1st(29th): James O'Brien
2nd(60th): Ruslan Bashkirov
3rd(90th): Louie Caporusso
4th(120th): Ben Blood

Conclusion:

It's without question that Bryan Murray inherited a team that had some bad contracts, impending free agents, a weak farm system and lack of depth. While you can criticize Murray for some moves, I think it's fair to say that he's done the organization more good than harm. Considering the propensity for Stanley Cup Finalists to have a regression the following season, people need to afford Murray the opportunity to continue with plans to right the ship. He's only been in the position for over a little over a year now and already, the organizational depth and prospects for the future have improved drastically.