Saturday, March 14, 2015

Statement Analysis: Joe Thonrton Versus General Manager Doug Wilson

Bergeron

                             Who is telling the truth?

I have put the quotes in chronological order.  

I.  GM Doug Wilson met with 350 season ticket holders and answered questions.  He is also later reported as telling the audience, "What is said here, stays here."  I do not know if this is an accurate quote.  

When asked why the player, Thornton was stripped of his team captaincy, he said:  

"He cares about the game so much. The reason we took the 'C' off him ... Joe carries the weight of the team on his shoulders and he's got such a big heart that when stress comes on him, he lashes out at people and it kind of impacts them.  The pressure and stress, I felt, was getting to Joe. And I sat him down and said we need other players to step up and share this. He got it. He didn't like it, but he got it and he understood it."



II.  Joe Thornton's response.  "I think Doug just needs to shut his mouth.  All I've got to say is I've been here every day working hard. I haven't taken a sabbatical. He just needs to stop lying, shut his mouth." 

III.  Doug Wilson's response to this:

"If he's got an issue, he knows exactly where I am, and I'll be

 glad to talk to him about it.  There's zero issue here. I was 

asked a question at a season-ticket holder function, and my response was to do my job and be accountable to our season-ticket holders and tell the truth. It's nothing I haven't said before."

This has been reported throughout media.  

Here is the actual question from the fan and the actual answer:

Question: “You talk about respect for every player, my question is with Joe Thornton and taking away the ‘C’ — is all this stuff that we read in the papers about he didn’t even know this was happening and he heard about it in the news. . . . If that’s truly what happened, I don’t know if I find that particularly respectful. I’d like to know what the real story of that is.”

WILSON: “I’m glad you asked. I’ve told David Pollak this. There are parts of the media that are not overly concerned with getting the truth. They’re worried about the first gossip, the first rumor.
“Joe Thornton, I’m a huge fan of Joe Thornton. I’ve known him since I was 18 in the world juniors. Joe Thornton loves this game. He’s one of the greatest players that ever played. He cares about the game so much. The reason we took the ‘C’ off him — and he was notified. Look, he and Todd had a meeting. I trust them both but sometimes what’s said and what’s heard might be whatever. There’s emotions involved. The both care about it.
“Joe Thornton, and I sat him down and I said, Joe, I have such great respect for you. He carries the weight of the team on his shoulders. And he’s got such a big heart that when stress comes on him, he lashes out at people and it kind of impacts them.
“Larry Robinson, one of the greatest leaders in the game and won nine cups, was never a captain. You can be a leader without a captain. But the pressure and stress, I felt, was getting to Joe, and I sat him down and said we need other players to step up and share this. Leadership group in this league is a shared thing, it’s not one guy.
“This says a lot about Joe. He got it. He didn’t like it, but he got it and he understood. And he said, ‘You know what? That makes sense to me.’ .
“He was never once asked to waive his no movement clause. Never once. I sat him down and I said, ‘Joe, we’re going to rebuild. We’re going to go young, you know who the players are and we’re going to try and do it as fast as possible. He said, ‘Doug, I’m in.’ We shook hands. That was the end of it.”

The analysis changes with the inclusion, for example, of how he referred to Joe Thornton, as we look at what portion of the statement produces the full name, just the first name, or the pronoun, "he" in the response.  

The setting for the statement is a tough one, where a General Manager is before a crowd of season-ticket holders (very expensive) and is meeting due to unrealized expectations by the team.  He was asked a specific question. 

Leaders often show strength through the pronoun "I", but we often find that when good news is delivered, the pronoun "I" is used, and on bad news, there is a need to share responsibility and the pronoun "we" is used.  Let's look at the complete statement made:

WILSON: I’m glad you asked. I’ve told David Pollak this. There are parts of the media that are not overly concerned with getting the truth. 

he begins by not answering the question yet; rather, that he, himself (pronoun "I") is glad she asked the question.  
Since he recognized that not all media is concerned with "getting the truth", we now hope that he, himself, delivers the truth.  

They’re worried about the first gossip, the first rumor.

Here he introduces the word "gossip" and the changes it to "rumor", which suggests to us that the reason that the C was taken away has only been "gossip" or "rumor."

What is his relationship with the player like?  We view his introduction and how he mentions Thornton over the course of the statement.  Remember also that this was a verbal answer, and the speed of transmission helps us get to the truth.

"I've told David Pollack this" is to introduce another name with the authoritative "told" in communicative language. 


Joe Thornton, I’m a huge fan of Joe Thornton. I’ve known him since I was 18 in the world juniors. Joe Thornton loves this game. He’s one of the greatest players that ever played. He cares about the game so much. 

He is "Joe Thornton", complete name, three times, making it sensitive.  
Note that he has known him since "I was 18 in the world juniors" and not how old the player has been.  
Note also that he marks time by himself, not the player and that he adds in that he was a professional hockey player.  This is all important to him before he answers the question.  

He is telling the audience:

he is glad to answer the question;
the question has been answered by gossip and/or rumor;
He indicates a need to persuade the audience of his favorable view of the player;
He, himself, was a professional hockey player. 

Since he has spoke for himself, we will see if this pattern continues.  


The reason we took the ‘C’ off him — and he was notified. 

He changed from "I" to "we."

Leaders often use "I" to deliver positive news, but "we" when they deliver bad news, in order to share responsibility and/or share guilt.  One study showed that high ranking leaders use "we" in emails, signaling that it is  a sign of leadership due to its numerical superiority (simply counting "we" versus "I" in their emails.  It is the contrary.  The same leaders introduce the pronoun "I" when they are taking credit for success, or in delivering positive news about the company.  

Regarding the removal of the "C", he used "we" in "we took the 'C' off him:

The use of "we", if used consistently, make speak, not so much of lack of ownership and responsibility for the decision, but that it was a shared decision.  We know this via context if: 

a.  he names others in the decision, 
b.  he alludes to others in the decision making process
c.  he remains consistent in the use of 'we'

"Look" shows weakness and need to persuade.  He is at a sensitive portion of the answer.  Having moved from "I" to "we", he continues this theme: 


Look, he and Todd had a meeting. I trust them both but sometimes what’s said and what’s heard might be whatever. There’s emotions involved. They both care about it.

Besides the need for emphasis with "look" he introduces another name, "Todd", but only first name.  
The word "but" refutes or minimizes the "trust" of them both. 


Joe Thornton, and I sat him down and I said, Joe, I have such great respect for you. He carries the weight of the team on his shoulders. And he’s got such a big heart that when stress comes on him, he lashes out at people and it kind of impacts them.

He continues with the formal use of the full name.  This is not speaking to a good working relationship. 
"I sat him down" is authoritative, having control over him.  This may be that Thornton did not sit when asked, but had to be told.  
"I said", is "said", not "told" regarding having great respect. 

He then goes to to break away from the quote, and to praising Thornton.  This is weak as it shows a need to portray Thornton in a positive light, especially if you take in the order, priority, name use and "look" in the answer, thus far.  


Larry Robinson, one of the greatest leaders in the game and won nine cups, was never a captain. 

He continues to avoid the answer signaling to us:  the answer is very sensitive to him.  This is a lengthy introduction.  

Lengthy introductions not only show sensitivity, but are found in 85% of deceptive statements, outweighing the main issue.  

"Larry Robinson" is the next name in his statement.  


You can be a leader without a captain. 

Note "a leader" is general and he still has not answered the question. 

But the pressure and stress, I felt, was getting to Joe, and I sat him down and said we need other players to step up and share this. Leadership group in this league is a shared thing, it’s not one guy.

a.  "but" refutes or minimizes (by comparison) the preceding statement about "a leader"
b.  "Joe" is now first name
c  "I sat him down" is repeated making it sensitive.  The body posture issue of "sat" shows an increase of tension.  This should be considered very high tension, due to both posture and repetition.  
d.  Note chronological order is broken with parenthetical view of leadership in general. 
e.  "we" is not clear if "we" is he and Joe, or the team. Since he mentions "other players" it should be considered the team in general and not specific unity/cooperation between him and the player.  

“This says a lot about Joe. He got it. He didn’t like it, but he got it and he understood. 

This indicates that a very strong argument likely took place.  Consider the repetition of "he got it" and the negative, "didn't like it" along with the fact that the subject needed to assert himself as once being a professional hockey player.  

This did not go well.  Note "he got it" is repeated" and then there is a change of language to "understood" which may cause us to wonder if this was clear to the subject, but not to the player.  The emphasis suggests otherwise.    

Note the use of "this" even though it happened months ago, which would normally elicit the word "that" due to distance of time.  This is a very uncomfortable stressful question for him.  

And he said, ‘You know what? That makes sense to me.’ .

Here he uses a question in an open statement.  It would be interesting to ask Thornton if this is an accurate quote?  
Next we see more answer about "rumor" and "gossip":  


“He was never once asked to waive his no movement clause. Never once. 

This uses passivity and avoids saying, "I didn't ask him to waive his no movement clause" or "Neither I, nor anyone in the organization asked him..."

"Never" is not "did not" and the repetition of the word "never" and the repetition of the word "once" (together) makes it very sensitive to him.  When taken with the passivity (which seeks to withhold responsibility and/or identity):    

This is unreliable.  



I sat him down and I said, ‘Joe, we’re going to rebuild. We’re going to go young, you know who the players are and we’re going to try and do it as fast as possible. He said, ‘Doug, I’m in.’ We shook hands. That was the end of it.”

The tension continues with the body posture in the language.  The use of "we" is about the team until we get to more body posture:

"we shook hands" which shows unity from the perspective of the subject, and not necessarily from the player. 


We have an important question:  

He stated that this "kinda " impacted "people." 

To whom was impact "kind of" felt?
To whom did he "lash out" against?

Please note the word "people" which is not, specifically, "players" or "teammates" which leads us to ask:

Is it possible that Thornton lashed out against management and not his teammates?

It is common for hockey captains to "lash out" on teammates but only on the ice or in private, and most uncommon for a targeted player to go to management to report it.  
Mark Messier used to warn younger players against slacking in two ways:
1.  "the look" where he would glare at them for the lack of hustle.  If this did not work:
2.  The elbow to the mouth.  
He was known for delivering this message to prima donna types, and then would follow up by taking out the young player to purchase him a new suit and dinner.  Players loved him. 

In follow up interviews, the players on Thornton's team, even anonymously, stated that they did not have problems with him.  

Who the "people" are is an important question.  

If teammates were impacted, they would have had to have gotten this information to management, even through media.  It is rare. 

But did he avoid saying "players" because the impact was "kind of" felt by management and not players?

I expected him to close with, "I told the truth" in his follow up reply to this statement. 

Here is what he said: 

III.  Doug Wilson's response to this:

"If he's got an issue, he knows exactly where I am, and I'll be

 glad to talk to him about it.  There's zero issue here. I was 

asked a question at a season-ticket holder function, and my response was to do my job and be accountable to our season-ticket holders and tell the truth. It's nothing I haven't said before."

Please note that in Statement Analysis we listen rather than interpret, and when interpretation is necessary, we look for the subject do it for us.  He reports that it is his job to be accountable and tell the truth, but he does not assert that he told the truth.  

Who do you believe?

The player said he needs to stop lying, implying that in the response to the fan, he lied. 

The manager says it is his job to be accountable and tell the truth. 


3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sounds like they stripped the "c" unannounced for the purpose of busting him down in perceived rank or status. A hotheaded moment over something someone said that sounded like something the "C" player would have done or said.

A sponser wanted more attention perhaps from a single player. A promotional ploy.

"We're going to go young..."

A leaderless group.

GetThem said...

This is probably a stretch, but Wilson says: "The pressure and stress, I felt, was getting to Joe." ------
1. When Wilson says "I felt" he is saying he was the only one who that pressure and stress was "getting to." Those are his own words.

I believe Joe Thornton. If Joe really was "lashing out at people" then it would have been made public by the people he allegedly lashed out at, or it would have been seen and discussed at or after games, or the GM would have made sure to announce it and given a warning to Joe for inappropriate behavior so the fans would know it's being addressed. Even though hockey has changed rules so much over the years, fights, checking, name calling, is still an exciting part of the game. I don't know much about Wilson, but he sounds like an idiot and Joe Thornton can COME BACK TO BOSTON any time.

mmmagique said...

I read it as though he does say that he told the truth.

He said "my response was to do my job and be accountable to our season-ticket holders and tell the truth."

He didn't say "my job was to..." he said "my response was to..." Put in other words, "this is what I did..."