Accountability Goes Both Ways

If the Oilers' leaders believe Mike Babcock has changed, they also have a role in making sure he has.

I have spent more time thinking about Mike Babcock than I expected to.

Part of that is because I have been trying to understand what bothers me about the Oilers hiring him. It is not that I think people are incapable of change. I hope they can. There are things I have done in my own life that I wouldn’t want to be judged by forever. I believe we are all more than the worst versions of ourselves.

But believing people can change isn’t the same as pretending the past didn’t happen. And giving someone another opportunity doesn’t mean handing them the benefit of every doubt before they have shown they deserve it.

That’s probably why the comments from Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl and Zach Hyman stayed with me.

Connor McDavid thinks Mike Babcock is the perfect fit for the Edmonton Oilers.

Leon Draisaitl thinks Babcock is the right person to get the team where it wants to go.

Zach Hyman, the only one of the three who has played for Babcock, says he had a very good experience with him in Toronto and considers him a phenomenal coach.

I have no reason to argue with any of them about that.

Those three understand hockey in a way I never will. They understand this team in a way I never will. They know what the room was like with Kris Knoblauch as the head coach. They know what was missing last season. They know where the Oilers need to improve, how the players respond to different coaching styles and what kind of voice they believe the team needs right now.

I watch the games from my couch or from the upper bowl at Rogers Place. They live them.

Their belief that Babcock is the right coach for this team is based on information and experience I don’t have and won’t pretend to have. It would be ridiculous for me to suggest that I understand the hockey decision of hiring Mike Babcock better than they do.

But this isn’t only a hockey decision.

That’s where things get complicated.

McDavid described Babcock as an experienced coach who has been through every important situation imaginable. He has won a Stanley Cup, Olympic gold medals and hundreds of NHL games. He knows who he is as a coach, McDavid said, and will not have to learn on the job.

Again, all of that is reasonable.

The Oilers aren’t a young team looking for a coach to guide them through the ups and downs of the early stages of a rebuild. Their best players are approaching or already into their thirties. They lost back-to-back Stanley Cup Finals before a first-round exit this past season. This is a team with a desire to win now. The idea that they want a proven coach who will arrive with clear expectations isn’t difficult to understand.

Draisaitl also acknowledged that there was history to discuss. He said the players had an honest conversation with Babcock, put everything on the table and were satisfied enough to move forward.

Hyman’s support might carry even more weight. He played parts of five seasons for Babcock in Toronto and says his own experience was positive. He believes Babcock helped establish a foundation for the young players who were developing there at the time.

I can’t tell Hyman that his experience did not happen. And I’m not going to tell McDavid and Draisaitl that they should have walked away from their conversation with Babcock feeling differently. But a positive personal experience is not the same thing as proof that everyone was treated well.

This is the part of this discussion I keep coming back to.

Mike Babcock’s reputation is not controversial because he asked players to backcheck harder. Or because he occasionally scratched someone fans thought should be in the lineup. Over the years, multiple former players have publicly described experiences they viewed as humiliating, manipulative or bullying.

Then came Columbus.

Babcock resigned before coaching a game after the NHLPA investigated concerns about him asking players to show him personal photographs from their phones. The NHL reviewed his Columbus tenure before his hiring in Edmonton and determined there was no basis to prevent him from working in the league. That means he was eligible to be hired. Eligibility isn’t the same thing as exoneration, though.

At his introductory press conference, Babcock was given an opportunity to explain what he had learned. His answer didn’t offer much. He said the situation in Columbus had been a poor fit and involved miscommunication. Asked whether he had crossed a line, he said no, although he added that making someone uncomfortable should cause a person to consider how they could have handled the situation better.

It’s not nothing. It’s also not a particularly meaningful accounting of a coaching career that has left several former players feeling mistreated. There was no clear explanation of what he’d done wrong or the work he had undertaken to change. No specific commitment about how his relationships with players would be different this time.

Mostly, we’re being asked to trust that things would be different. McDavid, Draisaitl and Hyman appear willing to offer that trust. I hope they are right. I also expect more from them than trust.

These aren’t three players with little control over what happens around them. From the outside, it would appear they are among the most influential people in the dressing room and, in practical terms, among the most powerful people in the entire organization. I’m not pretending to know the exact hierarchy inside the room, but it’s clear that what this group wants carries enormous weight. Babcock met with them before accepting the job. Their willingness to change on the ice convinced him that coaching the Oilers was an opportunity worth pursuing. Their approval clearly mattered to both the organization and Babcock himself.

That influence comes with responsibility.

It is easy to believe a coach has changed when you are not the player most likely to be targeted.

McDavid is the captain and the best player in the world. Draisaitl is one of the best players of his generation. Hyman is a respected veteran who has already had a successful relationship with Babcock. Perhaps Babcock will challenge them. I am sure he will. But their places within the organization are secure in a way that most players’ places never will be.

The real test will not be how Babcock treats Connor McDavid. It will be how he treats a rookie after a bad game. A depth player struggling to stay in the lineup. A goaltender who has lost his confidence. Someone without the stature or job security to push back when demanding becomes demeaning. That is when the endorsement of the leadership group will mean something.

The Oilers have spent much of the summer talking about accountability. Babcock is expected to demand it from the players. The stars appear to welcome that. Maybe this team needs more direct conversations, harder practices and fewer comfortable nights.

But accountability can’t flow in just one direction. It can’t mean that the coach holds the players responsible while nobody holds the coach responsible.

If Babcock humiliates a teammate, will they notice? If he isolates someone who doesn’t have the power to defend himself, will they step in? If the behaviour former players have described begins to appear in Edmonton, will McDavid, Draisaitl and Hyman remember that they helped assure everyone this time would be different?

This is not about expecting them to publicly oppose the hiring. They know more about the team than I do, had a conversation I was not part of, and made a judgment they were entitled to make. It is about what happens now.

They vouched for Mike Babcock, both privately and publicly. In doing so, they accepted some responsibility for the culture that develops around him.

Maybe that responsibility will never become a burden. Maybe Babcock has reflected on his past, changed how he communicates and found a better way to demand the things he believes winning requires. I genuinely hope that’s what happens.

But change isn’t established in one conversation with three star players. It’s established over months and years, especially in the way a coach treats the people with the least power.

McDavid, Draisaitl and Hyman believe Mike Babcock is the right coach to hold the Oilers accountable.

Now I hope they’re just as willing to hold Mike Babcock accountable, too.