I've been asked several times for my take on the Sutter situation, so I'll finish my day with some of my thoughts on Brent's move to Calgary.
I have to admit that I could not have been more wrong about this whole thing.
From the conversations I had with people around the Devils and the league after the season, I thought it was almost certain that he would be back next season. I know some players thought so too, while others have been saying recently that they knew he probably wouldn't be back.
After talking with Sutter a little more than two weeks after the Devils were eliminated, I could tell that there was a decent chance he wouldn't be back. Yet, the way he spoke about the rumors of him going to Edmonton (before that job was filled) and Calgary (before that job was vacant) led me to believe that he would coach the Devils next season or not coach in the league at all.
When Sutter stepped down two weeks ago and wouldn't say definitively that he didn't want the Flames' job and didn't rule out coaching next season, I thought there was a better chance he would end up in Calgary -- even though he said that he wanted to be closer to his family and the ranch and the Red Deer Rebels. So, here we are today and he is the Flames head coach.
I have no evidence that there was any tampering by Darryl Sutter here and I don't know how you could come up with any. You can't stop brothers from talking to each other and there's no way of ever knowing exactly what they talked about. (Just as we will never know what conversations Scott and Rob Niedermayer had in 2005 before Scott became a UFA). If they both say they never discussed the job before Darryl Sutter called the Devils to ask for permission on June 12, there's pretty much no way to prove otherwise unless they were dumb enough to put it in writing in an e-mail or one of the other Sutter brothers -- four of which now work for the Flames -- comes forward with some inside info.
That said, I don't think Darryl Sutter had to talk to Brent Sutter about the job. After firing Mike Keenan on May 22, Darryl Sutter said that he was probably the best person to coach the Flames, but there were some other coaches capable of doing the job that were under contract elsewhere.
Brent Sutter didn't need anyone to tell him directly that Darryl was talking about him. So, in the back of his head, he had to know he had a good shot at getting the Flames' job if he left the Devils.
He claimed the Flames' job opening had nothing to do with his decision to leave the Devils and maybe that is true, but it sure doesn't look that way two weeks later.
I do believe Brent Sutter missed his family and felt responsible for things in Red Deer. That he never hid. If he didn't get a long with Lou Lamoriello, he hid that pretty well. In many ways they have identical personalities.
Although none of the players seem to hold it against Sutter for leaving, I think there is reason for several of them to be upset. He talked a lot this past season about how his first season in New Jersey was a process for the Devils. They had to go through that transition year to get everyone to buy into the way Sutter wanted to play.
Some players got pushed harder than others and some became better players because of it. Some, such as Patrik Elias, received more pushing than they deserved at times. But, the majority, particularly the guys who were around for the first season, did buy into what Sutter was selling and trusted him thinking he would be around for the payoff.
Two years later, Sutter is in Calgary and the Devils are looking for another coach with another personality that will require adjusting to and, possibly, more system alterations.
Brent Sutter did not fulfill his promise with the Devils. He abandoned them after two seasons in which he could not get them out of the first round of the playoffs. He had his reasons for leaving, but he abandoned them nonetheless.
So, there is reason for the players to be uspet with him for leaving them. It's also understandable why owner Jeff Vanderbeek said he was left with a bad taste in his mouth by Sutter's quick move to Calgary.
As GM, Lou Lamoriello's job is to stay even keeled. Vanderbeek was a fan before he was an owner and, in some ways, he still thinks like a fan.
Lamoriello doesn't think that way because he can't afford to. So, it's not suprising to me that he didn't express anger today. He might need to talk trade with Darryl Sutter some day.
He's also in the process of conducting a coaching search in which he needs to talk to candidates who are under contract elsewhere and needs/needed permission to interview them. And who knows in the future (yes, Lamoriello will probably conduct another coaching search at some point) what candidates he will want to talk to and how their tenures in their previous places of employment ended.
Yes, Lamoriello could have made Sutter wait until his contract with the Devils expired. What would have the Devils have gained from that? I can't think of anything.
Perhaps, however, Lamoriello gained some future good will (and possibly something off the books) from the Sutter clan. He also doesn't look like a spiteful person and that might work to his advantage in the future as well.
***
Finally, congratulations to Lamoriello for finally being voted into the Hockey Hall of Fame today. It was an honor that was long overdue. He would have been worthy of being in the Hall as a builder even without all he has accomplished with the Devils, yet I've seen year after year of less-worthy candidates -- many of whom were, by coincidence, Canadian -- get in.
There have been reasons over his 40-plus years in hockey for many not to like Lamoriello, but his career stands as the definition of what it means to be a "builder" -- from being one of the founders of Hockey East to helping make U.S. colleges a bigger source of NHL players to aiding players from the former Soviet Union in their bid to come to North America and, last but not least, transforming the Devils from laughingstocks into three-time Stanley Cup winners.
I had concluded that this honor would have to wait until after Lamoriello retired (as Herb Brooks had to die before he made it into the Hall of Fame), though other executives who were still active (Glen Sather, Cliff Fletcher, etc.) had been voted in previously. I was pleasantly surprised to hear today that was I wrong.
Well said, TG. I think you are right-on. I had hopes that Sutter would be back, but there were just too much of a golden opportunity for him with the Flames. Of course the Sutter brothers spoke about it prior to June 12th, but obviously they aren't going to say that. I think Lou took the right approach with the whole thing. What could he possibly gain by holding Sutter back from taking the job? In these times of political correctness, he didn't really have much choice. Hopefully, what goes around comes around for Lou and this proves to be the right move by him.
Posted by: Al | June 23, 2009 at 11:12 PM
i agree with all of the above. Great reporting today TG, and i for one really appreciate it.
Oh and i think it would be WAY to transparent to get a favorable move on Friday between the flamers and the Devils.... i don't think that will happen. That said, I hope Calgary doesn't make the playoffs next year
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 23, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I think Lou handled this the best way he could. There was nothing to be gained by taking a hard-line stand against Sutter. As a fan, I'm glad Lou took the high road instead of lowering himself to some snarky Brian Burke level.
Posted by: Peter | June 23, 2009 at 11:25 PM
AMEN peter spot on....
TG a question... probably among the many you have had today, but what is the thoughts around the league about this? are we the only ones with the "bad taste" or is there similar sentiment around the league? what are the thoughts of other reporters around the league, aside from Burnside, who i can honestly say i have little respect for?
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 23, 2009 at 11:31 PM
I agree with pretty much everything you said, TG. Though Sutter isn't my favorite person right now, he was a good coach and he had this team headed in the right direction. That's why Lou should be looking for a coach who can take over and finish what Sutter started. The last thing we need is for a coach to come in with a different style and have to go through another transition period.
Posted by: FOTC | June 23, 2009 at 11:34 PM
From the reporters I talked to, the common sentiment is that something smells funny about the whole situation, but there's nothing that can be proved and nothing that can be done about.
Steve McFarlane of the Calgary Sun raised some questions about it yesterday.
Posted by: TG | June 23, 2009 at 11:39 PM
This is why A) I am glad to have Lou at the helm even though we complain about him once in awhile, we all see things through a filtered view at times, only seeing the devils and their problems, when really Lou has made them one of the top organizations in the league
B) this is why I keep coming back to this blog, TG you write tremendous stuff, have a solid opinion on things, and give us the fans the opportunity to learn more about our team and the nuances of the NHL, so from a die hard Devils and Gulitti follower, thanks
Posted by: Jim B | June 23, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Great job of reporting for what was a very long day for you, Tom.
Lou Lamoriello showed class today. As far as Brent Sutter is concerned, his initials are what he's about and erase the first two letters of the word class.
The Devils will get someone better than Sutter and will go farther than the Flames will under Brent Sutter's alleged tutelage.
Posted by: Noam N. Kogen | June 23, 2009 at 11:43 PM
I think the variable here was the issue of compensation. If there was never any to be had then it would have been pointless to hold Sutter back from coaching in Calgary. If compensation had been available, it would have been a totally different story.
Like Lou said, let's move forward. There is a still a coach to sign and free agency is quickly approaching. Draft is also coming up and there are a number of good prospects out there for the Devils @ 23. I am hoping for Stefan Elliot or Tim Erikson personally....
Posted by: Tom | June 23, 2009 at 11:45 PM
I hope sutter's farm burns to the ground, neither the flames nor his crappy minor league team win a single game, and his wife nags him to the point of insanity.
Posted by: dannyd | June 23, 2009 at 11:46 PM
TG do you have a link to his blog? i guess i am glad that were not the only ones wondering about this move
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 23, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Oh, and congrats lou even though you're increasingly wearing thin with me...please let madden join the quitter in calgary, and no to either gio or oduya if they want more than in the low $3 million range.
Posted by: dannyd | June 23, 2009 at 11:48 PM
PJ-I think this is it:
http://www.calgarysun.com/sports/hockey/2009/06/23/9895811-sun.html
Posted by: Tom | June 23, 2009 at 11:52 PM
And Devils fans, remember this one fact, it could be worse.... you could be Joe Buck :)
i guess the only thing that will make me feel better tonight will be the amazingness that is the movie Bloodsport.... Its on the Versus channel right now and its terrible yet amazing at the same time!
Oh yeah one more thing, Brent Sutter better check under his bed tonight because i am sending Michael Westen after him, and we all know that Michael Westen kicks so much a$$ that Sidney Crosby wears pajamas with his face on them out of respect AND fear!
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 23, 2009 at 11:53 PM
thanks for the link Tom..... interesting stuff..... still don't feel like this was the most honorable thing i have ever seen in the hockey world. its kinda like turning your back to the play and waving your stick in the goalies face... dirty pool
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 23, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Michael Westen is no Jack Bauer.
Posted by: Tom | June 24, 2009 at 12:00 AM
Tom i dig most of your posts, and totally agree with your points, but on this your dead wrong :) Jack Bauer wears Michael Westen pajamas :)
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 24, 2009 at 12:02 AM
http://www.calgarysun.com/sports/hockey/2009/06/22/9884636-sun.html
This is the one I was talking about.
Posted by: TG | June 24, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Jack Bauer could torture a personality into Brent Sutter. Nuff said
Posted by: Tom | June 24, 2009 at 12:05 AM
HAHAHA TOM! thats too good!
And thanks for the Link TG, i think your collegue is pushing it a bit though by calling him one of the best coaches in the league..... to this guy you can;t be considered a top coach in the league if you haven't been out of the first round of the playoffs, but he definitely has potential to be a top guy one day. That said, i still hope the Flames miss the playoffs this year.
Oh and Sean Avery BEGS for Michael Westen's sloppy seconds :)
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 24, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Thanks for the link TG. Seems the Sutters have put their respective reps on the line right now. I never realized how bad Daryl Sutter butchered the cap last year and with Brent's departure of the Devils I can't see too many future NHL jobs for these guys should they not have success in the next few years.
Posted by: Tom | June 24, 2009 at 12:09 AM
Well, Sutter finished fifth in the coach of the year voting, so I guess you could say he was one of the best coaches this year. Then again, that voting is based soley on regular season performance.
Posted by: TG | June 24, 2009 at 12:10 AM
its true, and i was one fan who thought that Brent should have been in the top 3 for the Jack Adams award but to put him in the class of a Mike Babcock,John Tortorella, or any other coach that has taken their team to AT LEAST a cup final is pushing it. Heck he doesn;t have the NHL credentials of guys who are unemployed in the NHL coaching ranks right now, ie, Laviolette, Tippett, Crawford(recently hired) or Bob Hartley.
Posted by: Pearl Jammed | June 24, 2009 at 12:14 AM
This is the best overview of the whole saga, TG. You've put it better than anyone else I've seen so far with proper perspective of the messy situation as it were. Thank you for this sorting.
One side note, I watched the press conference live on Calgary's site and their owner emphasized that today's announcement was very significant in the organization. I'm reading that as, "If this doesn't work out, Darryl Sutter is done in Calgary." Did you see the conference and did you get the same impression, TG?
Posted by: John Fischer | June 24, 2009 at 12:16 AM
I think he was a good coach but I wasn't a fan of his calling out players in the press. That may work in the short term, but in the long term that never is beneficial.
Posted by: Tom | June 24, 2009 at 12:16 AM