Jump to content

Is Michel Therrien a real genius like Don says?


habs rule

Recommended Posts

Here is a quote from Scott Stinson. This was written by him totally and all credit is to him.

"MONTREAL CANADIENS

The Canadiens are one of the league’s more confounding franchises.
They won their division in 2012-13, made it to the Eastern Conference final last year,
yet have been in the bottom third of the league in puck-possession statistics.
From a results standpoint, they have managed to do what their rivals, the Toronto Maple Leafs, have not:
Defy the law of averages.
Perhaps the results can simply be chalked up to the presence of an all-world goaltender in Carey Price,
an excellent top defence pair in P.K. Subban and Andrei Markov, and enough depth throughout the lineup
to prevent the bad stretches that trip up other teams not particularly adept at possessing the puck.
This is a team, after all, a team, whose leading goal scorer in the playoffs last season, Rene Bourque, is currently projected to be on the third line.

Given the team’s recent success there was a fair bit of roster churn in the off-season.
Out are Thomas Vanek, Brian Gionta, Josh Gorges and Danny Briere, and in are P-A Parenteau,
Tom Gilbert and Manny Malhotra. Montreal has chosen to address the loss of veteran leadership
by anointing everyone a leader: Max Pacioretty, Tomas Plekanec, Subban and Markov
will all share alternate captain duties, while Price will also sit in on those leader meetings,
where presumably they will discuss things like grit and toughness.
As long as Price is stopping pucks, they should be fine."

Maybe I have been wrong and MT actually knows what he is doing? Can that be?

Are possession stats a coach's responsibility? Or is that just something that just happens based on players abilities?

Or have I been right and if it weren't for Carey Price this team would be in the shitter?

What do you think ? Does MT have some mystic genius that turns a team with terrible stats in certain ares, like 5 on 5 scoring, power play dropping like a rock last year. Or is just Carey Price.?

Flame on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was to give an EA Sports style rating for Therrien it would be an 80 Overall.

He's a pretty good coach with some discernible flaws. Sometimes those flaws don't cost the team at all. Other times it can mean the difference between a win and a loss. His reluctance to play the younger players through errors and mistakes might help the teams current status but who knows what it will do to long term development. That said, I'm glad we picked him over Bob Hartley and I'm glad we didn't drop him the moment Guy Boucher became available.

He isn't the best head coach available, but I have a hard time thinking on who would be better out there. Especially based on recently fired coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if he is a genius or not, but his record this time around is stellar, with some of the best hockey the Habs have played since the last cup. Making the playoffs, beating the Bruins last year, and I am watching a team that I think can win any game they are in, so it could be worse.

One thing I can say for him is no coach in the NHL is under such a microscope, not even Carlyle, and MT has handled things with dignity and class throughout this tenure.

I'm not an MT basher, and am quite content actually....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

Some would argue, if just flip goalies with Leafs; then Carlyle would look much smarter then Mr.T

I wouldn't go that far. They still have Dion Phaneuf as their captain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carey Price would demand a trade if he had to deal with the Leafs defensive system.

Reimer is a decent 2A goalie. Bernier might be a genuine number one, though he might just be a Halak style platoon starter. Both goalies are left out to dry the way we used to leave Theodore out to dry. Read up on their failures using the swarm.

Toronto is good at scoring goals and not letting in goals that should be goals. They are bad at possession and any form of defence that isn't based in net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is it about the system that MT employs that allows this team to win games in spite of some pretty sad stats? Any ideas? Cause I don't see it. I really want to see it cause if there is no system then if Price goes down this team is forked big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is it about the system that MT employs that allows this team to win games in spite of some pretty sad stats? Any ideas? Cause I don't see it. I really want to see it cause if there is no system then if Price goes down this team is forked big time.

The Habs possession stats aren't great, but they aren't as bad as Toronto. They're in the bottom half of the league, but where they are, they only bleed a couple of shots against more per game. Not something that can't improve, but it's not a doomsday scenario by any means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if he is a genius or not, but his record this time around is stellar, with some of the best hockey the Habs have played since the last cup. Making the playoffs, beating the Bruins last year, and I am watching a team that I think can win any game they are in, so it could be worse.

One thing I can say for him is no coach in the NHL is under such a microscope, not even Carlyle, and MT has handled things with dignity and class throughout this tenure.

I'm not an MT basher, and am quite content actually....

I'm not well enough informed or competent to judge coaches generally, but I do tend to agree with your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are no fun. Here I am trying to get at least a reasonable discussion going, and you guys are all running away from the question. What is this great system that defies all the odds? I want to know. Besides we pretty much know who is going to make the team. No big surprises there so lets try some thing a little more invigorating. What the hell is it that make this team successful. Last year they were lost, got Vanek took off and then Vanek dies useless(coaching error imo) in the playoffs. Nobody has said anything except "the record". Well how did we get that record cause until Vanek showed up (a genius move by MB) this was a team in sad shape. We get a sniper and suddenly we are good. I do not see a new sniper in our off season dealings. What is it that makes us so confident that team will compete with at that level again? Is there a real system or is it called " thank the great pumpkin we got Price".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember the specifics, although I seem to recall the habs changing their system entering the playoffs last season so that it more closely resembled what MT had implemented in 2012-13. And I remember being puzzled that Genius changed it in the first place.

What I dispute is that this is a mediocre team being saved by Price's heroics night after night. I've seen teams like that (e.g., 2002) and this is not one of those IMHO. Price is unquestionable the cornerstone but he is not single-handedly making the Habs effective like Theodore in his Hart season.

Frankly, I have no serious critique of MT. The behaviours for which he is attacked - leaning on vets in the crunch, mixing and matching his lines - are shared by 99% of coaches nowadays. My one concern is that none of the young players visibly improved last year, and Eller regressed; but how much of that is his fault?

Therrien, in my view, is one of a large number of good, qualified NHL coaches out there. He is not up there with Babcock or Quennville, one of the elite. He'll do for now. I originally predicted that he would be out on his arse in Year Three; it looks more and more like I was right out to lunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This team wins because of goaltending and team defense...and it has had a 2-3 decent puck movers out of the back end which helps the forwards look better. This team needs a significant offensive force at C or RW to be legit...and that's without losing much of the remaining top 6. JMHO

Perhaps Galchenyuk can be that "force" in the next 1-2 years...though I don't think Therrien is the coach to develop him into that 80 point potential he has. Pacioretty is a great player who needs a Getzlaf type C to take him to the next level of production. Gallagher is a spark plug best suited to a second line. Pleks is a good 2nd line C...or a great 3rd line C. DD is, IMHO, the kind of 2nd line C that low seeded playoff teams have...but he's elevated in Montreal into more then he is. Parenteau is similar to DD without the fan love in...but he's clearly a below Vanek in talent and threat level.

So, I give Therrien credit for getting everything out of these guys...

Here's some trivia...how many 100 point scorers have the Habs had? Bear in mind, while infrequent now it was much more common though the 80's and 90's. While 100 points is infrequent today...how many 80 point scorers have the Habs had since the late 90's? Want to know why we haven't had a cup since '93...start there IMHO. We never have high scoring, franchise level, offensive talent at forward. Pisses me off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so nobody knows what this system is. I really respect both cuke and zow and I hate to say this but there is no system. The results are what counts.

Cuke remember patrick in 93, nobody was going to beat him. He walked into dressing room and said that. Price is like that. Not saying he is Patrick but damn close. Zowpeg nothing you said can I argue with, but this is a potentially a very good team coached by a very mediocre coach who makes very strange dubious decisions at best. But hey that is ok, cause only the record counts. Well we will see but hey fortunately he says he imputing a new system

HOO RAY :hyper: :hyper:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, your reasoning contains one serious flaw. No matter how good the analysis on this site--and we are good, very good, with gusts up to great-- the fact that we cannot see (or have not bothered to dissect) MT's system does NOT prove that such a system does not exist.

In fact, a hockey coach--and by extension, the team-- does not have A system. There are a series of systems nested within an approach to the game, grounded in the coach's philosophy of how the game should be played. Therefore, there is a system, or systems, for breaking out of the defensive zone, breaking into the offensive zone, for the PP and the PK and so on.

The Score recently posted an analysis of MTL's approach to penalty killing-- the system as it were-- and why it was so good. www.thescore.com/nhl/news/588022

"..a very mediocre coach who makes very strange, dubious decisions at best....only the record counts"

Q. What do they call someone who makes decisions others have difficulty understanding--and on the surface make no sense-- yet achieves outstanding results given what they have to work with?

A. A genius :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, your reasoning contains one serious flaw. No matter how good the analysis on this site--and we are good, very good, with gusts up to great-- the fact that we cannot see (or have not bothered to dissect) MT's system does NOT prove that such a system does not exist.

In fact, a hockey coach--and by extension, the team-- does not have A system. There are a series of systems nested within an approach to the game, grounded in the coach's philosophy of how the game should be played. Therefore, there is a system, or systems, for breaking out of the defensive zone, breaking into the offensive zone, for the PP and the PK and so on.

The Score recently posted an analysis of MTL's approach to penalty killing-- the system as it were-- and why it was so good. www.thescore.com/nhl/news/588022

"..a very mediocre coach who makes very strange, dubious decisions at best....only the record counts"

Q. What do they call someone who makes decisions others have difficulty understanding--and on the surface make no sense-- yet achieves outstanding results given what they have to work with?

A. A genius :D

Excellent post!

Good coaches have many systems, and can beat teams at their own game many times. He is always changing to suit particular situations, and there is always room for improvement. Last year we saw him move away from a possession style strategy, to a dump and chase, and back and forth again.

I think he wants to know his team inside out, and develop a total understanding of what he has at his disposal for a roster, and be able to adapt accordingly to the competition's game. Seems to me he is taking a semi-long term approach, to have a very flexible team, that can beat any team, consistently, and by any game plan. That to me is building a strong team, with strong character, and a strong sense that they are indeed an elite team in the end.

Doesn't hurt to have a superstar goalie, a premium defenseman, and one of the best goal scorers in the NHL, but I see a coach, with many strategies, and a way to get the most from his team, ala beating the Bruins.

I'm satisfied, and a bit intrigued with where this team may actually go, and not looking forward to any coaching change anytime soon.

The Therrien critics can go on and on about advanced stats and possession, but it's wins and team chemistry/confidence that matters, and I think we are on the brink of being serious contenders....

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, PMAC's post is excellent. :thumbs_up: The last time this team had "no system" was when Carbo was coaching and his "system" consisted in hoping like hell that Kovalev would have a good night. I would never say that MT has "no system," but PMAC is right that teams vary their system as need dictates. I'm also not the type to crap on a coach's head because of advanced stats or because of disagreements with micro-decisions he makes during a game (which is a beloved habit of fans on the internet). I'm a "forest, not trees" guy. Therrien has thus far gotten the most out of his talent and there are no players you can point to as grossly under-utilized. The rest is details.

This team, I suspect, is a second-tier contender: not among the core clear-cut contenders (Chicago, LA, Boston, maybe Anaheim and St Louis) but in the outer ring, with teams like Tampa Bay (actually my pick to come out of the East), NYR, Pittsburgh, San Jose , maybe Dallas and Colorado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't include Anaheim in the clear-cut section. St. Louis is no different to the San Jose's and the Vancouver's before them. I agree we're just on the outside of being a clear cut contender. Chicago, LA and Boston are the powerhouses of the league. We need our differential to increase. Keep our GA around the 200 mark or lower, push the GF closer to the 250 mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't include Anaheim in the clear-cut section. St. Louis is no different to the San Jose's and the Vancouver's before them. I agree we're just on the outside of being a clear cut contender. Chicago, LA and Boston are the powerhouses of the league. We need our differential to increase. Keep our GA around the 200 mark or lower, push the GF closer to the 250 mark.

Yeah, I added "maybe" to Anaheim and St. Louis for just that reason. Certainly I agree that the Big Three are those you list - there is room for debate around the margins, but rationally you have to single out those three as the "core."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that I am in the land of the believers. Results matter, stats are for losers. I hope sincerely that you are all correct. I do want this team to succeed, and MT has been at his best in not attacking his players and throwing fits. Possibly the tiger can change it's spots :) . I have been very impressed by the attitude change in him, or he just hasn't been pushed far enough. He and MB seem to make a really good team. The future will answer all but I will say that if some of this teams stats do not improve such as possession we could be in for a rough ride. Thankfully we have Carey to cover up the mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Results matter, stats are for losers.

Results matter, and stats can help lead you to the results. They can also lead you down the wrong road. They can also seem correct today and wrong tomorrow due to new stats, or wrong today and right tomorrow.

When it comes to Therrien and team systems, something I've learned over the years is that sometimes a coach can try as hard as he can to apply something and a team still doesn't listen. And sometimes that goes for every team. If you watch all 30 teams in the league, including international competition, you'll see a team look like they are trying to protect a small lead in the third. Rarely do they pump the gas and try to widen the margin. That is rarely due to coaching and almost always due to psychology. Jacques Martin was quoted saying he tells the team to never sit back on a lead, but we saw it quite often. Team Canada in Sochi had a tendency to sit back on leads as well. That isn't coaching but the players themselves. When you have a lead, you are not as desperate. You're not as hungry. You think more about not making a mistake. You might still be giving 100% but your 100% will be different to the guy trying to tie the game up. The guy trying to tie will make riskier plays that can be exposed, but the guys in the lead will react to that risk differently. You'll notice rookies are more likely to jump on errors and make errors than veterans because veterans are always thinking of risk management. No matter who you are or where you are coaching, the illusion of sitting on a lead is going to happen.

Montreal has strong possession early in the year and strong possession in the playoffs. We were a strong possession team in 12-13 until the playoffs. We can play a possession game, but our consistency to play it is a problem. Whether that's coaching or the players maturity themselves? Up to debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

,I think you were right about Price, Subban, Markov. This team goes as they go. Therrien a genius? Far from it. MB gives Subban long term deal, 72 million, and leadership A on his jersey. MT thinks same player should not kill penalties or play to protect leads late in games. But Cube and Murray can! lol Ironic that Subban may have saved the coaches job (in the big comeback against Sens last season). Word being that Therrien was done had they lost. Subban dominated and all but won the game for the habs in the last three and half minutes. The coach never mentioned PK after the game. However when the kid makes a bad play late in a game MT makes sure we all know it. Heard PK rave about Molson, MB, Serge Savard,Gerrard Gallant even Mike Babcock (upon signing the new deal)...stating how they have all helped him and his game. Very obvious that Therrien was not included (again) in the alternate captains praises.

I was on the fence about MT when he was hired. I mean who else was available other than Roy? Was not impressed the first time he was with the habs in 03. Even less impressed with how he finished up in Pitt with the Pens. After watching the habs24 program last year and listening to Therrien??? I laughed out loud at the guy. Genius? Don must be kidding. If Therrien did not speak french he would not be working in the NHL. imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Results matter, and stats can help lead you to the results. They can also lead you down the wrong road. They can also seem correct today and wrong tomorrow due to new stats, or wrong today and right tomorrow.

When it comes to Therrien and team systems, something I've learned over the years is that sometimes a coach can try as hard as he can to apply something and a team still doesn't listen. And sometimes that goes for every team. If you watch all 30 teams in the league, including international competition, you'll see a team look like they are trying to protect a small lead in the third. Rarely do they pump the gas and try to widen the margin. That is rarely due to coaching and almost always due to psychology. Jacques Martin was quoted saying he tells the team to never sit back on a lead, but we saw it quite often. Team Canada in Sochi had a tendency to sit back on leads as well. That isn't coaching but the players themselves. When you have a lead, you are not as desperate. You're not as hungry. You think more about not making a mistake. You might still be giving 100% but your 100% will be different to the guy trying to tie the game up. The guy trying to tie will make riskier plays that can be exposed, but the guys in the lead will react to that risk differently. You'll notice rookies are more likely to jump on errors and make errors than veterans because veterans are always thinking of risk management. No matter who you are or where you are coaching, the illusion of sitting on a lead is going to happen.

Montreal has strong possession early in the year and strong possession in the playoffs. We were a strong possession team in 12-13 until the playoffs. We can play a possession game, but our consistency to play it is a problem. Whether that's coaching or the players maturity themselves? Up to debate.

Very good post MOLG as always. I really can't find anything i disagree with in there.

,I think you were right about Price, Subban, Markov. This team goes as they go. Therrien a genius? Far from it. MB gives Subban long term deal, 72 million, and leadership A on his jersey. MT thinks same player should not kill penalties or play to protect leads late in games. But Cube and Murray can! lol Ironic that Subban may have saved the coaches job (in the big comeback against Sens last season). Word being that Therrien was done had they lost. Subban dominated and all but won the game for the habs in the last three and half minutes. The coach never mentioned PK after the game. However when the kid makes a bad play late in a game MT makes sure we all know it. Heard PK rave about Molson, MB, Serge Savard,Gerrard Gallant even Mike Babcock (upon signing the new deal)...stating how they have all helped him and his game. Very obvious that Therrien was not included (again) in the alternate captains praises.

I was on the fence about MT when he was hired. I mean who else was available other than Roy? Was not impressed the first time he was with the habs in 03. Even less impressed with how he finished up in Pitt with the Pens. After watching the habs24 program last year and listening to Therrien??? I laughed out loud at the guy. Genius? Don must be kidding. If Therrien did not speak french he would not be working in the NHL. imo

I think we agree totally but who knows what will happen. A key injury (price) and we are screwed in my opinion but can't blame that on the coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is he a genius? I don't think so. He is a more than competent head coach though. Most neutral analysis of the habs over the last two seasons have had them as a fringe playoff team at best, yet they still managed to far exceed expectations both years. Personally my only complaint from last year is that he used Boullion on the power play far too often (or even too often in general). I hated this. Boullion was like a black hole on the left side, which did nothing to help the young guys getting their shot on the second unit. Still, that is a pretty minor complaint and should not be a problem for this upcoming season.

Similar to the Yankees of MLB, there is no rebuilding in Montreal, so it remains a tough balancing act of winning now and developing for the future. Therrien has proven he can win, this year he will have to prove that he can take a couple young guys to the next step. I think he is more than capable.

In closing I should mention that i am not french, in fact I live in a rural community in Central Alberta. With that in mind I think we could do a hell of a lot worse than Therrien and will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt until he gives me reason to do otherwise. Watching him over the last decade+ I feel like he knows what his faults are and is actively trying to rectify them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does seem that Therrien has learned from his past mistakes. Inept player management helped cost us the series against the Canes in 2002, and the players basically rebelled on him in Pittsburgh such that the Pens were forced to fire him mere months after re-upping him to a big contract. These were reasons why I was ripping my hair out when we hired him. However, even when I was running him down, I always made sure to add the rider that coaches (like everyone else) can LEARN and improve - cement-heads like Torterella excepted. Could be that we hired him right at the point where had gone through his NHL growing pains and was ready to settle in as an effective mid-range NHL coach. The verdict is still out, but every year he survives and the team does well is one more year of his proving us skeptics wrong.

For the record, I still think Crawford is wrongly maligned and would have done just as well ;) But MT has done the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...