More than a month after the Bruins hired an independent law firm to investigate the organization's player-vetting process in wake of the team’s signing of Mitchell Miller, the team announced the findings of the report on Thursday — including a number of measures designed to improve their vetting procedures for players.
The independent review — led by former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch of the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison — concluded on Thursday, and included interviews with key Bruins employees and the review of thousands of documents and communications related to the signing of Miller.
“The steps we are announcing today underscore our organization’s commitment to our values, including our process for vetting future players,” Boston Bruins CEO Charlie Jacobs said in the release. “These improvements, which the team will begin implementing immediately, will help ensure that we are meeting the high standards our associates, fans and community expect from this great organization.”
According to the review, while there were “gaps” in the club’s vetting procedures as it pertained to Miller — a player with “significant red flags”, it adds that there was “ no misconduct by Bruins employees” during the process.
“Throughout our independent and thorough review process, the Bruins’ leadership and employees cooperated fully. Based upon our review, we have recommended a series of changes and enhancements to the process of vetting future players,” Lynch said in the release.
Here are the recommendations from the report as it pertains to the Bruins’ vetting process moving forward.
- Establish clear written policies for vetting off-ice conduct, including identifying red flags requiring detailed vetting and documented resolution
- Establish clear timetables and responsibilities within the organization to investigate prospects’ community or other off-ice commitments
- Establish centralized documentation of vetting to include reporting on red flags and off-ice issues and ensure such documentation is available to all stakeholders involved in the process
- Establish a tracking system to ensure responsibilities for all vetting tasks are clearly assigned and tracked.
- Utilize independent third-party resources to investigate and resolve factual issues when reviewing red flags
- Determine whether there are specific training or rehabilitation programs the prospect should participate in depending on the nature of the red flags
BSJ Analysis
Frankly, the details released from this report — and the lack of serious ramifications for those in the organization who signed Miller despite the bevy of red flags and documented incidents surrounding his abuse of Isaiah Meyer-Crothers — don't come as much of a surprise.
Considering all of the readily-available information surrounding Miller’s history — coupled with the Bruins’ logic-defying decision to not contact Meyer-Crothers and his family once before signing Miller — there wasn’t much to uncover in terms of the Bruins’ actions here that we couldn’t discern for ourselves.
Perhaps no “misconduct” was at play here from the Bruins, according to the review — although the reckless manner in which they went about this signing and the pain of bringing up this story for Meyer-Crothers and his family once again would seem to push back against such an assertion.
But I guess this review wasn’t exactly conducted to examine plain common sense and empathy.
Also, for what it’s worth, the release of this review’s findings and the apparent lack of disciplinary action do not signal the end of this ugly chapter for the franchise.
Even though the Bruins announced back on Nov. 6 that they were cutting ties with Miller amid a wave of backlash from fans and even players in Bostons’ room, Miller is still technically under contract with the team.
So in order for the Bruins to fully sever ties with Miller, they’d have to agree to a mutual termination with the player – which seems unlikely, given the financial implications for Miller. As such, the Bruins may have to wait until the next buyout window to move on from Miller, which would still see the team relinquishing a solid chunk of money.