Alex, thank you so much for doing this. You have been with the Kraken even before they were officially the Kraken. You've seen so much! Talk us through how your role and your responsibilities have evolved over your time here.
So, when I came on, before Ron Francis was hired as general manager, I honestly forget what my title was. But my job was researching the general manager, so that was a fun little twist, getting to be a part of hiring your own boss. When Ron came on, I became director of hockey strategy and research, which basically meant I was overseeing the research and development (R&D)-analytics department, as well as assisting with general strategic decisions. From there, I became assistant general manager, which was a great honor, and I oversaw the research and development team as well as amateur scouting. And now, this year, I transitioned to doing R&D and pro scouting. So, I've been able to touch a bunch of things throughout that journey. I got to know every single one of our hockey operations hires, because as they were brought on, I was in charge of getting their computer and setting up their email address. And as the one who is actually living in Seattle, especially during the COVID times, I got to wear a bunch of different hats. And just bringing everyone on board.
To that point, every hockey team has a GM and assistant GMs. But not every assistant GM role looks the same. There are different responsibilities among your team. You shared some of what you're responsible for, but how does the team break up those responsibilities so that you're covering all the bases?
Every team does it differently. I would say that General Manager (Jason Botterill) and Ron (Francis), our president of hockey operations, don't have time to be involved in the day to day…I'll call it minutia. We have quite a large staff when you think about the scouts and how they're distributed, player development. So, each assistant GM, whether it's myself, Ricky Olczyk, or Ryan Jankowski, we've all taken on different departments that we're overseeing, and we're involved in the day to day. We can keep Jason and Ron updated on what's happening as necessary. We can communicate with the directors and the staff beneath them to make sure that there's a pulse on everything that's happening moving forward. In addition to the departments that we're leading, all the assistant GMs when we're thinking about preparing for the draft, or thinking about free agency or the trade deadline, that's when that leadership group gets together. We're all working and thinking through decisions and going that way. So, for as much as we specialize, we are also all generalists and involved in just making sure that the team is running successfully.
To that point, I wanted to ask you, because Jason Botterill, who's now the Kraken’s GM, was an assistant GM with you prior. How has that communication evolved with him now being a general manager?
I think relationships are huge. With Jason, I had a great relationship when he was assistant GM, and now he's my boss, so it's a little bit different dynamic, right? But I think that strong relationship maintains, and it's been fun watching him take on that additional leadership role of being the one in charge, if you will. We have a great relationship. We're constantly in contact, our entire management group…we have a bunch of text threads always going on.
Everyone has different communication styles. When leadership changes, do you have to pause and say, ‘Oh, maybe now it's this method of communication at this rhythm?’ Do you have to do that kind of evaluation when team members change over the years?
For sure. And I think, especially with head coaches, that's always a huge component. It's not just how to communicate. A lot of times, it's how people want to receive information and data. A lot of our (work on) the research and development side of things, when we're maybe thinking about a trade target and we're writing a report…one person might want to have a PowerPoint presentation made. Another person wants to look at a bunch of charts, and another person wants to read 10 pages of text, right? Knowing your audience and knowing what's going to be well-received, even though, personally, I might not enjoy writing the 10 pages of text (laughs) if that's what gets the message across, then that's how the team has to deliver the message. And so, we really tailor that message, whether it's for coaches…and even different coaches on the staff we know have different preferences and how they receive information. And then (the same for) management as well.
Speaking of the R&D department, for those of us who do fall on more of the stats side (of analysis) look at the caliber of the team that you've built, and they might think your group is ‘just stats’ or ‘just analytics.’ What can you share with us about how your team helps all parts of hockey, both what we see on the ice and maybe other parts of the department that we don't see?
I think of our department as we're full of problem solvers. We are like these special task forces that can go whether it's to coaches, whether it's down in Coachella, to player development, to strength conditioning, and ask, ‘What problems are you facing?What data do you have that maybe is sitting in an Excel workbook?’ and ‘how can we make your life easier?’ I think that's a really key component. Yes, we have very smart people creating these fantastic - what we hope are fantastic! - things like player evaluation models or coaching tactics and looking at these different things. But at the end of the day, we're also trying to create systems software that can improve the quality of life for everyone (on the coaching and team side) and (for those who are travelling) around the world, so that a scout isn't worried about, ’How am I entering a report into the system?’ They're worried about going to the game and being able to identify player talent for the Kraken.
How do you fold in that proactive outreach of, ‘How can I help you?’ within the demands of a season? How frequently are you going back and revisiting any team’s needs and how to communicate answers back in the best way?
I think a lot of it comes from the fact that we're involved in all these departments from a procedure and information perspective. There are very few scouting meetings…for example the pro scouts are having a meeting-- or amateur scouts or player development -- that we don't have at least one representative from the R&D department in. So, I think we see firsthand how they're solving problems and what are the friction points? What are the questions that they're asking? So, we're not waiting for them to come to us and say, ‘Oh, I have this problem. Can you solve it with XYZ?’ We are in the meeting, and we leave the meeting and say, ‘We think they're having this problem. Maybe we could create XYZ, right?’ And I think that's a really powerful thing, where we aren't outsiders within these different groups. We are entrenched in the same way a scout is entrenched in the problems (they are trying to solve).
Do you have a feel for how different that approach might be from other R&D teams and other organizations? One way is certainly not better or worse, but this approach just sounds different from the paradigm we've expected or perceived of people who are working in a lot of data.
I think it certainly is going to vary from team to team. I know there are some peers across the league where that's what's happening, and then there's some where maybe they're a little bit more on the outside. And sometimes people want to keep numbers and the scouting side separate, right? We're a team where they are separate, but ultimately, when we're making decisions and talking about things, that's when they come together.
With all that you’ve shared, big picture, what have you learned about the importance of intentional communication and the approach that you're using with your team at big decision points and big moments to help the entire department?
Once you're in a hockey team, you really start to understand the cadence of the calendar and when the pressure points are for people making these big decisions. I'll use the draft as an example. Like you might think that for the draft, we need to decide who we're drafting by an hour before the draft. But that’s not the case. If you're going to make a huge stand for a player or a class of player that has to be done (much earlier). There are mid-season meetings in January; there's final meetings in May. (On draft day) you can't just randomly bring up, ‘Oh, actually, we should draft this player who's 20 spots down our draft board,’ right? So, I think understanding the cadence of how people make decisions…and that's just one example…is really key.
You have overseen both pro scouting and amateur scouting. How valuable has that been, and how does that continue to inform all that you're working on and all that you're touching?
I think it’s a privilege to be able to touch all the different groups. On the analytics side, we are involved in all the groups, but when you're really in the trenches, whether it's with amateur scouting or pro scouting, I think you learn a lot about how these teams are working. Amateur scouting is super fun and exciting, but there is this notion of the fact that you don't actually know if you've done a good job for a few years down the road. Pro scouting is a little bit more unique, because in January, we were talking about who we wanted to acquire at the trade deadline to make our team better. You make the decision and they're playing for your team the next night, right? So, I think you see more of the immediate impact in pro scouting. It's also more important to think about team fit, team chemistry, what your team needs, and how this player can solve that need. On the amateur scouting side, you're much more thinking about how do we draft the best player available?
Last question. Are there moments where you're seeing the impact of you having this role? We used to be able to count on one hand the number of non-white men who were in visible, powerful positions in hockey. Have you seen moments where you’re just doing what you do best and it is helping open more doors or keep them open?
I think the fact that now there are more (women in hockey) is an important aspect, and I would never take credit for that. I think there's so many different women in the league (now) that we become (more) visible. And I love that! Now, when people meet me, they're not like, ‘Oh, you're just that one woman, right?’ There's more that they have to think through in their Rolodex. And I think that's really powerful. And when I go to a rink, whether it's for an amateur tournament or even an NHL game, to be in a room where you aren't the only one feels really nice.
This conversation was lightly edited for brevity and clarity.
