Jump to content

Recommended Posts


Interesting bits here. I don't think one can infer from the fact that Therrien has an accurate read on his team's strengths that he will therefore be an excellent coach. What I did find interesting was that the Desharnais line was apparently the 5th most productive 1st line in all of hockey (!). This, to me, confirms two things:

1. We don't really need that big, saviour centreman everyone has been hankering for (it'd be nice, but not a necessity); and

2. We DO really need wingers to play with Pleks.

A further bit of good news is that PK Subban measures up rather well, statistically; if we can complement him with a healthy and productive Markov, we should be much better placed for next season. But this analysis tends to confirm what's been gnawing at me, namely, we lack secondary scoring and MB has thus far done absolutely nothing to address that. (Of course, he has the whole summer to fix it, but we can no longer consider the UFA route for this purpose, barring maybe Doan or a longshot like Mueller).

Anyway, I thought I'd draw attention to this peculiar article, in case anyone else wants to ruminate on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the article and it seemed to state a lot of very obvious points.

In the hockey world that's sometimes absolutely necessary. I just got into a Facebook discussion where a bunch of Leaf fans kept espousing the, "The only reason the Leafs suck is x" as if there's a one process fix. Even the Red Wings fan was completely stupid about it, thinking that his team did x better so the Leafs need to be more like the Wings. It was myself and another Leaf fan just constantly rolling our eyes and repeating the same thing until we let the snake eat itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These guys are giving profs a bad name. There are lots of intelligent and interesting ways you can analyze a team and/or a coach.

This is not one of them.

Thinking that anything intelligent can be uncovered by examining what a coach said in his first press conference is just ridiculous. There is no real reason to belive that what a coach says is what he thinks. The coach is trying to make a good first impression with the media, with the fans and with all the players. He is trying to motivate the stars and the journeymen. Maybe he believes Price is overrated, Kaberle is washed up or that Desharnais is too small. Is he likely to express these views in his opening press conference?

Apparently these profs would increase their evaluation of MT if he had opened his PC by saying that Kaberle is over-the-hill and that Gomez is an albatross because the numbers seem to reflect these evaluations. Would your own evaluation of MT as our new coach improve if he said these things?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...