Bruins: post mortem

[Salem's Lot]

Great points, and that's part of why I am not whole-heartedly in either camp. I can see reasons for both leaving, but the replacement simply can't be a Rutherford-type castoff, or a promotion of Cassidy from Providence.

Fun fact, and to your point about there being many, many more poor options to replace Julien/Chiarelli than good ones: Steve Kasper was serving as Toronto's Director of Pro Scouting and got (rightly) canned along with 18 scouts total. He also said this previously when asked whether the Leafs use "anything other than eyeballs" to evaluate talent:


Lots to be wary of.

This is where I'm at as well. There are several things that I absolutely hate about Chiarelli (drafting record, contracts, emphasis placed on depth rather then acquiring elite talent) and Julien (overall stubbornness, development of younger players, ice time distribution) that would make me want to pull the plug. On the other hand, they have had a track record of success and I don't see a clear replacement. I do think Chiarelli is out. I'd expect him, Bradley, Ferguson and Cassidy (Providence coach) out with Sweeney being promoted to GM. I could actually see them keeping Claude around for a season in this scenario. Sweeney seems to be Neely's guy and Neely is Charlie Jacobs' guy. Everybody played nice when Jim Benning was around to be the adult in the room. Now that he's gone it seems like the lines have been drawn. I could be totally off base but this is what I think is going to happen. For better or worse.

 

[RIFan]

This is where I'm at as well. There are several things that I absolutely hate about Chiarelli (drafting record, contracts, emphasis placed on depth rather then acquiring elite talent) and Julien (overall stubbornness, development of younger players, ice time distribution) that would make me want to pull the plug. On the other hand, they have had a track record of success and I don't see a clear replacement. I do think Chiarelli is out. I'd expect him, Bradley, Ferguson and Cassidy (Providence coach) out with Sweeney being promoted to GM. I could actually see them keeping Claude around for a season in this scenario. Sweeney seems to be Neely's guy and Neely is Charlie Jacobs' guy. Everybody played nice when Jim Benning was around to be the adult in the room. Now that he's gone it seems like the lines have been drawn. I could be totally off base but this is what I think is going to happen. For better or worse.

Not sure why Cassidy is thrown in there.  He's gotten a good deal of credit for preparing some of the young D over the last few years.  He also got them in the playoffs 3 years in a row.  This year in particular was an achievement given that after the promotions/waiver losses there isn't a lot of NHL caliber talent beyond a couple of players.  If he's gone, it's because he gets an NHL opportunity.  Overall, I think that if they keep Claude they also keep Cassidy since they want to run an organizational scheme and Cassidy has proven adept at coaching Claude's system.

 

[Red Right Ankle]

They signed Seidenberg to the extension in Oct 2013 and they tried to move him before his injury in Dec 2013?
 
That doesn't make much sense.
 
Off to another point that keeps popping up in this forum, the hand wringing over NMCs. Why is this such an issue for people? It's not a Chiarelli thing, it's league wide. You're signing a guy within a year of him being able to test unrestricted free agency, seems reasonable that since they're giving up that option, they should have some say over where they'll be traded. Does anyone really think if you go to a guy with a NMC saying you want to move him, he'll just say no, I'm going to stay right here where I'm not wanted? That seems like an extreme longshot to me. Maybe a guy will prefer to go to a certain city, but I'd be stunned if it were just a flat no. Maybe once in a great while, you have to take 99 cents back when you could've got a dollar without a NMC. Not even close to worthy of all the complaints the NMCs raise here.

Just to follow up on this, the average number of players with NTCs/NMCs per team is 6 for the 2014-15 season.  The Bs have 9.  They are on the higher end, but not wildly so.  The teams with an above average number besides Boston are a varied bunch, some good, some bad: CHI, ANA, PHI, PIT, VAN, MIN, SJ, WAS, DAL, NYR, FLA.  
 
http://www.thefourthperiod.com/no_trade_list.html

 

[Toe Nash]

Great points, and that's part of why I am not whole-heartedly in either camp. I can see reasons for both leaving, but the replacement simply can't be a Rutherford-type castoff, or a promotion of Cassidy from Providence.

Fun fact, and to your point about there being many, many more poor options to replace Julien/Chiarelli than good ones: Steve Kasper was serving as Toronto's Director of Pro Scouting and got (rightly) canned along with 18 scouts total. He also said this previously when asked whether the Leafs use "anything other than eyeballs" to evaluate talent:


Lots to be wary of.

Except Toronto has hired analytics wunderkind Kyle Dubas (now the interim GM) and seems to be on the slow road to righting the ship. Other stats guys have been given prominent roles as we know. There are plenty of qualified people out there, both from analytics backgrounds and old-school coaching and preferably a combination of the two, as every other Boston team employs. You don't just get some random GM out of a hat if you fire Chia -- maybe you make a bold decision and hire someone progressive.
 
Do Jacobs and Neely make that decision? Who knows. And I guess if they don't you stick with Chia, but that's sort of sad if that's the reasoning. "There's no one better" shouldn't be an excuse.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Not sure why Cassidy is thrown in there.  He's gotten a good deal of credit for preparing some of the young D over the last few years.  He also got them in the playoffs 3 years in a row.  This year in particular was an achievement given that after the promotions/waiver losses there isn't a lot of NHL caliber talent beyond a couple of players.  If he's gone, it's because he gets an NHL opportunity.  Overall, I think that if they keep Claude they also keep Cassidy since they want to run an organizational scheme and Cassidy has proven adept at coaching Claude's system.

I honestly don't know enough about the day to day in Providence to have an opinion on Cassidy. I'm just speculating based on conversations that I've had. There's supposedly a giant fault line running through the front office and Cassidy is a Chiarelli guy.

 

[Toe Nash]

I also think it's useful to revisit threads when some players were signed.  There was not much (any?) condemnation of the Kelly & Campbell signings when they occurred. http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/72699-chris-kelly-412-and-greg-campbell-348-re-sign/page-2

This doesn't matter...they could have dumped Campbell at any point in the last two years and seen improvement. I'm fairly sure the barrier to doing so wasn't his contract; it was their poor valuation of what he brings to the team. Sometimes good or "ok" contracts go sour and smart teams make the right decision,

 

[RIFan]

I honestly don't know enough about the day to day in Providence to have an opinion on Cassidy. I'm just speculating based on conversations that I've had. There's supposedly a giant fault line running through the front office and Cassidy is a Chiarelli guy.

Fair enough. Sweeney is the Prov GM and spends a lot of time there working with the team. If things unfolded with Sweeney getting the Chia's job he'll have more than enough insight on if Cassidy is the right guy or not.

 

[lexrageorge]

Except Toronto has hired analytics wunderkind Kyle Dubas (now the interim GM) and seems to be on the slow road to righting the ship. Other stats guys have been given prominent roles as we know. There are plenty of qualified people out there, both from analytics backgrounds and old-school coaching and preferably a combination of the two, as every other Boston team employs. You don't just get some random GM out of a hat if you fire Chia -- maybe you make a bold decision and hire someone progressive.
 
Do Jacobs and Neely make that decision? Who knows. And I guess if they don't you stick with Chia, but that's sort of sad if that's the reasoning. "There's no one better" shouldn't be an excuse.

Why do you think the Bruins eschew statistical analysis?  I seem to recall Chiarelli saying they do use various metrics when it comes to evaluating players, etc.  And the Bruins did revamp their own scouting department.  
 
I'm also not saying that there's noone better, or using that as an excuse.  I'm just saying if you take an honest assessment of Chiarelli, he probably comes out in the upper half of GM's in the league, if not better (I'll say better).  And I honestly don't see any argument that would support the contrary.  That alone is not a reason to avoid making a change.  However, it does mean that there's a nonzero chance the team could end up with a worse GM, especially if the mantra is to win now at all costs.  

 

[cshea]

Ryan Nadeau is the Bruins analytics guy. They have an analytics department and have had one for years, but he got the title last offseason. Dubas is a bit more high profile because of his age, background, and the market he is in.

 

[ivanvamp]

Why are you acting like the Bruins are the Leafs or the Oilers? They did finish with 96 points which I think is the most points for a non play off team in history. Your post is full of extreme hyperoble. Hopefully you were kidding. If you think this board is full of Black and Gold teamers to paraphase a  Felgerism then you have not been paying attention. Thoughtful posters such as Salem's Lot and Dummy Hoy have heaped criticism on the team when it is called for. The bolded is uncalled for and untrue to say the least.    

 
If the Bruins turned three - just THREE - regulation losses into wins, that's six more points.  Those six extra points would have put them in fourth place in the conference.  And we're not remotely having this conversation.
 
 
They really aren't far off from being a pretty good team, despite what looks like a really crappy year.  

 

[lexrageorge]

This doesn't matter...they could have dumped Campbell at any point in the last two years and seen improvement. I'm fairly sure the barrier to doing so wasn't his contract; it was their poor valuation of what he brings to the team. Sometimes good or "ok" contracts go sour and smart teams make the right decision,

Well, first, I tend to doubt the Bruins were going to just dump a guy who was coming back from a horrific leg injury suffered in the prior season's playoffs.  Can't say I blame them for wanting to see if Campbell would benefit from a healthy offseason as opposed to one undergoing rehab.  This stuff ain't that hard to look up, and the reasons behind such decisions usually go way beyond the team just being dumb.

 

[kenneycb]

I'm just happy nobody has mentioned Chia not buying out Kelly last offseason. Yet, that is.

 

[FL4WL3SS]

One of the major points that has only been lightly touched on is that the "cap hell" situation that they're in is in large part to poor forecasting on where the cap would be at this point.  I would imagine most calculation had the cap rising above $75M by now.  Chicago must have certainly figured that would happen.  They have 60% of their cap tied up in only 6 players.   Toews is an elite player but is he worth 4M more AAV than Bergeron?  You can't throw out put out that the cap has been mismanaged by using the Kelly's and Campbell contracts as examples without recognizing the value contract of Bergeron, Chara, and Marchand.  Even at his reduced level of play, Chara at $6.9M the next 2 years and $4.0M in 17-18 is a relative steal given the contracts out there.  The cap situation is largely a byproduct of having a succesful team and attempting to squeeze out as many deep playoff runs as possible combined with lower than expected cap growth.  It might not have been perfectly managed, but it's far from being mismanaged.  
 
I also think it's useful to revisit threads when some players were signed.  There was not much (any?) condemnation of the Kelly & Campbell signings when they occurred. http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/72699-chris-kelly-412-and-greg-campbell-348-re-sign/page-2
I'll also add that the NMC that Kelly holds is a non-issue.  The NMC was only in full for the 1st two seasons.  The NMC is now only for 8 teams of his choosing.  It's not a barrier in the least to moving him if they decided to.  I believe that most of the NMC's they have given are structured similarly.

I just want to give this post some love. Very well thought out and rational.

 

[FL4WL3SS]

This is where I'm at as well. There are several things that I absolutely hate about Chiarelli (drafting record, contracts, emphasis placed on depth rather then acquiring elite talent) and Julien (overall stubbornness, development of younger players, ice time distribution) that would make me want to pull the plug. On the other hand, they have had a track record of success and I don't see a clear replacement. I do think Chiarelli is out. I'd expect him, Bradley, Ferguson and Cassidy (Providence coach) out with Sweeney being promoted to GM. I could actually see them keeping Claude around for a season in this scenario. Sweeney seems to be Neely's guy and Neely is Charlie Jacobs' guy. Everybody played nice when Jim Benning was around to be the adult in the room. Now that he's gone it seems like the lines have been drawn. I could be totally off base but this is what I think is going to happen. For better or worse.

The fact that you still think that Claude does not develop young players tells me a lot about you. It's been proven many times on this board that this isn't the case, yet you continue to belabor the point.
 
In fact, the 3 things you listed about Claude are not even an issue. There may be instances where you don't agree with Claude sticking with certain players, but every coach has that and it's not unique to Claude. They're trying to win games and keep their jobs. And please explain to me how ice time distrubution is an issue? Claude has been one of the best coaches in the league at managing the ice time of his players and utilizing the depth of the lineup - how is this a bad thing? Their success has been predicated on that strategy.

 

[Blacken]

If he and Claude stay on I won't be rending garments about it

I am not sure I believe this.

 

[Salem's Lot]

The fact that you still think that Claude does not develop young players tells me a lot about you. It's been proven many times on this board that this isn't the case, yet you continue to belabor the point.
 
In fact, the 3 things you listed about Claude are not even an issue. There may be instances where you don't agree with Claude sticking with certain players, but every coach has that and it's not unique to Claude. They're trying to win games and keep their jobs. And please explain to me how ice time distrubution is an issue? Claude has been one of the best coaches in the league at managing the ice time of his players and utilizing the depth of the lineup - how is this a bad thing? Their success has been predicated on that strategy.

I'm not advocating firing Claude. I was listing things that I question about him and Chiarelli. I don't like the way they handle young skill players. I don't like when a guy like Ryan Spooner has a great camp but is sent to Providence because they would rather have the corpse of Simon Gagne on the roster. I didn't like how much playing time guys like Greg Campbell got this season. I believe that decisions like these are the reason we're discussing the off season instead of talking about match ups against the Rangers. Does that mean I think he should fired? I'm not sure, I was asking the question (because I'm honestly town on the subject) and giving my opinion. We can agree to disagree.

 

[cshea]

Campbell says he's not coming back. And away we go...

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

Dan Cagen ‏@DanCagen  1m1 minute ago
Gregory Campbell is not returning to the Bruins.
 

 

[Reardon's Beard]

So it begins.

 

[Toe Nash]

Ryan Nadeau is the Bruins analytics guy. They have an analytics department and have had one for years, but he got the title last offseason. Dubas is a bit more high profile because of his age, background, and the market he is in.

Sure, they have one. I have a hard time believing the dept has much say.

 

[Toe Nash]

Well, first, I tend to doubt the Bruins were going to just dump a guy who was coming back from a horrific leg injury suffered in the prior season's playoffs.  Can't say I blame them for wanting to see if Campbell would benefit from a healthy offseason as opposed to one undergoing rehab.  This stuff ain't that hard to look up, and the reasons behind such decisions usually go way beyond the team just being dumb.

But he was never very good to start with. There was little reason to keep him around beyond sentimentality.
 
And as THIS season went on, the reasons to keep him around became less and less.

 

[lexrageorge]

Sure, they have one. I have a hard time believing the dept has much say.

Why do you say this?  Your statement contradicts statements that the Bruins have made in the past, so I think you need to back your assertion up a little bit. 

 

[Blacken]

Sure, they have one. I have a hard time believing the dept has much say.

Keep digging.

 

[teddykgb]

I'm not advocating firing Claude. I was listing things that I question about him and Chiarelli. I don't like the way they handle young skill players. I don't like when a guy like Ryan Spooner has a great camp but is sent to Providence because they would rather have the corpse of Simon Gagne on the roster. I didn't like how much playing time guys like Greg Campbell got this season. I believe that decisions like these are the reason we're discussing the off season instead of talking about match ups against the Rangers. Does that mean I think he should fired? I'm not sure, I was asking the question (because I'm honestly town on the subject) and giving my opinion. We can agree to disagree.

 
I wouldn't fire either of them, I think.  Barring something we don't know about, I think we made the deal with the devil last season to GFIN and had to pay the piper this season.  You do this eyes wide open and it seems to me quite unfair to then complain about the bad half of the deal.  The Iginla move was made to try to get this group a 2nd cup.  Few complained at the time and I agree with the idea that there was a real opportunity to put together a team that could challenge for the cup while Chara was still big Z and everyone was in their prime.  I just can't fault them now because we had to live the downsides to the plan, it seems like it was the plan all along.
 
I don't think they did a great job of adapting the plan this season.  Neither Chiarelli in the off season nor Claude all season seemed to be able to find a way to mold the group they had available into something better than the sum of its parts.  The injuries definitely played a role, but I quoted the post above for a reason.  Spooner is the best example in all of this that gives me pause about the pair -- the way he played since he came up was borderline unfathomable.  In a year where we missed the playoffs by a handful of points, it's hard to believe having him playing sooner might not have been a difference maker.  If I were Neely, I'd want to have a really good understanding of what we're doing internally that denied a guy like that a chance until things were so desperate that we had no choice but play him.  How many other Spooners do we have? Did the kid just "get it" at the exact time we needed him or was it there all along and something within our organizational philosophy made it impossible to recognize it?
 
No matter what, the choices moving forward will require a different approach to roster construction as you dig out of the cap troubles and the unanticipated flat cap.  One of the only ways forward that doesn't require a complete rebuild is the successful identification of young talent and incorporation of that young talent into the squad.  Especially with an aging core that is hovering around properly paid / over paid, the game here will be finding the next batch of Lucic, Marchand, etc.  I think Claude and Chiarelli have largely focused on rounding out a roster they felt was a contender and as a result have opted for vets over upside but that was a completely reasonable strategy given their aspirations.  Can they execute on a different strategy together?

 

[FL4WL3SS]

I'm not advocating firing Claude. I was listing things that I question about him and Chiarelli. I don't like the way they handle young skill players. I don't like when a guy like Ryan Spooner has a great camp but is sent to Providence because they would rather have the corpse of Simon Gagne on the roster. I didn't like how much playing time guys like Greg Campbell got this season. I believe that decisions like these are the reason we're discussing the off season instead of talking about match ups against the Rangers. Does that mean I think he should fired? I'm not sure, I was asking the question (because I'm honestly town on the subject) and giving my opinion. We can agree to disagree.

So the fact that Spooner was sent down in place of Gagne is Julien's fault and doesn't fall at the feet of the GM?
 
And pointing solely to Campbell to make your point about ice-time is ridiculous. I don't think the 4 extra shifts per game given to any of the other fourth liners would have made the difference.

 

[RIFan]

I'm not advocating firing Claude. I was listing things that I question about him and Chiarelli. I don't like the way they handle young skill players. I don't like when a guy like Ryan Spooner has a great camp but is sent to Providence because they would rather have the corpse of Simon Gagne on the roster. I didn't like how much playing time guys like Greg Campbell got this season. I believe that decisions like these are the reason we're discussing the off season instead of talking about match ups against the Rangers. Does that mean I think he should fired? I'm not sure, I was asking the question (because I'm honestly town on the subject) and giving my opinion. We can agree to disagree.

Actually that's not true.  Charitably, Spooner had an underwhelming camp.  He had a decent final exhibition game that gave him an roster spot to open the season.  You can argue a short leash in he only had 5 games to start the year, but he was not good in those 5 games.  Despite having mostly offensive zone starts, he didn't record a point in those games.  3 of those 5 were at home, so the last change gave allowed Claude to pick his matchups.  The 5th game was at Detroit and he ended up stapled to the bench. 

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Campbell says he's not coming back. And away we go...

 
Giddyup. That's promising.

 

[Red Right Ankle]

 
 
 

Until the last two seasons, they guy had some damned fine shifts for this team and one amazing one.  I can't say he'll be missed, but he'll be remembered.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I am not sure I believe this.

 
I really won't. I'm old and tired now, and besides it would be churlish to pout that they were staying after all the success they've had over the last 8 years. I would prefer to see changes, but if changes in personnel don't come along I'll be alright as long as changes to approach do.

 

[Blacken]

Aw, our lil' Hesketh's growin' up.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

The fact that you still think that Claude does not develop young players tells me a lot about you. It's been proven many times on this board that this isn't the case, yet you continue to belabor the point.

It has absolutely NOT been "proven". It has been vehemently asserted, yes, but that's very different from"proven".

It is impossible from a fan's viewpoint to know where the problem lies, exactly, but it is pretty obvious that player development is and has been a problem for the Bruins.

That is not the same as saying "no young players develop under Julien" which is pretty obviously false. But that's not the same thing.

Is Ryan Spooner a player development success or a failure? The obvious answer is that he's a success. When they needed him, he came up and was a key part of a late playoff push that was nearly successful.

But I would call Spooner a player development failure. They almost dumped him - with a second round pick - for a lousy player (Chris Stewart). They maybe could have used him last season (speed would have looked good against the Habs) and absolutely needed him before Feb 20 this year. But he was an afterthought until an injury to Krejci left them no other choice - he was the only other center with offensive talent in the system.

Obviously he made the most of this recent opportunity where he had not done so in the past. But it stretches credibility to argue that, presto, he flipped the switch from "not ready" to "ready" at the exact time when Krejci happened to get hurt.

Julien's fault? Not necessarily but that would be my guess.

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

Joe Haggerty ‏@HackswithHaggs  57s57 seconds ago
Milan Lucic: "I can say for sure the loss of Johnny Boychuk definitely affected me at start of the year. That was a tough one to get over"
 

 

[FL4WL3SS]

He's a center - with Krejci, Bergeron and Soderberg on the team where exactly did you want them to put him? He wasn't going to get an opportunity until one of them got hurt, which is exactly what they should have done. 

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

Michael Giardi ‏@MikeGiardi  29s30 seconds ago
"Character is the toughest thing to replace." - Tuukka Rask on the losses of Boychuk, Iginla & Thornton

 
 

Michael Giardi ‏@MikeGiardi  33s33 seconds ago
"This yr, we kind of got caught in building process & didn't get to the level we wanted after losing that character" - Rask

 
 

Joe Haggerty ‏@HackswithHaggs  39s39 seconds ago
Lucic: "Think I relied too much on David (Krejci) & forgot basics of my gm. 1 lesson from this yr was to not rely so much on other players"
 

 

[Reardon's Beard]

Yeah, stop being lazy Lucic.
 
But man if he can get motivated and Neely fires him up he could be a terror next season. I hope he sticks.

 

[Rico Guapo]

Paille not being resigned either.

 

[cshea]

Paille joins Campbell and won't be back.

 

[Reardon's Beard]

Paille joins Campbell and won't be back.

 
Well, I can say so far it's a WINNING day.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Paille joins Campbell and won't be back.

The Bruins could stand pat and improve by subtraction.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Apparently Chara said he has a torn PCL that is permanent and cannot be repaired via surgery.
 
Happy Monday everybody!

 

[cshea]

So here's what we've got so far:

- Chiarelli and Julien haven't been told anything about their status. Operating like they'll be back.
- 11 and 20 are gone.
- 17 told Chiarelli that he wasn't in the right frame of mind going into the year. Chiarelli says he has to think it over on re-signing 17.

 

[PedroSpecialK]

Chiarelli on Lucic:
 
"Wasn't up to snuff this year. Re-signing him will be a difficult decision that will require a lot of thought. He's paid a good salary now and will be paid more."
 
Why say right now - publicly - that he'll be paid more than $6m?

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I took that as Chia saying he might get more than $6 million, but it's not likely going to be from the Bruins.
 
The players really hated that Boychuk trade, huh? It's April and it's seemingly fresh in their minds. While the trade was unfortunate you'd like to see the players be a bit mentally tougher about his departure.

 

[Reardon's Beard]

Apparently Chara said he has a torn PCL that is permanent and cannot be repaired via surgery.
 
Happy Monday everybody!

 
I just talked to my medical wife on that one. I guess yeah you can keep operating with that tear, not ACL level kind of injury, but it means you are compromised. Would make perfect sense he played more tentatively and was slower (besides age).
 
I believe you can do it via surgery but that's knee replacement level territory.

 

[yeahlunchbox]

Chiarelli on Lucic:
 
"Wasn't up to snuff this year. Re-signing him will be a difficult decision that will require a lot of thought. He's paid a good salary now and will be paid more."
 
Why say right now - publicly - that he'll be paid more than $6m?

 
Why say it? Because Chiarelli still hasn't learned that you don't have to air everything out, and sometimes it's actually advantageous to keep things close to the vest. For reference see trashing Tyler Seguin at the draft right before he was trying to trade him.

 

[Reardon's Beard]

 
Why say it? Because Chiarelli still hasn't learned that you don't have to air everything out, and sometimes it's actually advantageous to keep things close to the vest. For reference see trashing Tyler Seguin at the draft right before he was trying to trade him.

 
1) put the pressure on him to perform if he wants to stay and get paid 2) put the pressure on him to play and perform next year if he wants to get paid by anyone 3) he doesn't care, not like it's top secret information

 

[kenneycb]

Or we are just overreacting to a fairly innocuous comment.

 

[jk333]

Reading online, PCL would be reconstructive surgery with a 6 to 9 month rehab window. Alternatively, they can work the Quadriceps and be back sooner. Hopefully more rehab will let Chara be closer to 90/95% than he was this season.

 

[NickEsasky]

 
Giddyup. That's promising.

Clode will still find a way to play him 15 minutes a night. 

 

[Ed Hillel]

Chia, on not being aggresive enough: "It could be a personnel issue, or it could be some, uhhhhh, other things as well." Awkward.