Jump to content

Who will it be part 2? The coaching question.


Commandant
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dang it. Hartley to flames..

Crawford and Therien? Hells no!

If this is the case, I'd rather have Roy and his Torts affect than washed up, recycled coaches. Might as well re-hire Martin instead, lol.

And, I'd rather have Galchenyuk than Huberdeau. Nevermind 3rd overall plus for Huberdeau.

Ive been going over concepts for trades.. I feel a PK plus for Yakupov.. with Tinordi, Beaulieu and a plethora of good young D available in this coming draft. Sell high! lol

I hope LA sweeps so we can get on with the off season lol..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes when things all seem to point to only one or two possible conclusions, it turns out that was not ever going to be the final answer.

Let me throw out a hypothetical scenario from left field. Maybe we're getting all worked up over nothing. What if Bergevin has already made his choice and it is not nor has ever been any one of Hartley, Crawford or Therrien?? What if he's waiting to make his annoucement till later because the person isn't free of their current committments? Is it possible that someone like Larry Robinson or Lemaire or both could possibly be the one [or ones] and we could have a great coach or team that we'd all be thrilled with?? Is that possible??

Bergevin and his team seem very calm and relaxed with no visible panic. Maybe it's settled and they've got their #1 choice and just have to wait to announce it. Is this possible??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to add to and expand the thought that maybe we already have our #1 choice. I've read in a few places that Crawford is taking a daily intensive french speaking course. Would he do that if he wasn't getting the job? Again, just thinking outside the box a little, if Bergevin and his team decided after the interviews that Crawford was the best choice, maybe agreeing not to make an announcement for a month or a few weeks gives Crawford the chance to greatly improve his french speaking abilities and be able to communicate in french the day he is introduced. It could be settled and our #1 choice could be in the bag!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes when things all seem to point to only one or two possible conclusions, it turns out that was not ever going to be the final answer.

Let me throw out a hypothetical scenario from left field. Maybe we're getting all worked up over nothing. What if Bergevin has already made his choice and it is not nor has ever been any one of Hartley, Crawford or Therrien?? What if he's waiting to make his annoucement till later because the person isn't free of their current committments? Is it possible that someone like Larry Robinson or Lemaire or both could possibly be the one [or ones] and we could have a great coach or team that we'd all be thrilled with?? Is that possible??

Bergevin and his team seem very calm and relaxed with no visible panic. Maybe it's settled and they've got their #1 choice and just have to wait to announce it. Is this possible??

Very possible, I mean, what do any of us know? Its all pure speculation at this point, but it sure is entertaining. I'd just add that, if it is all settled, and they are just waiting for the right time to announce it, then Bergevin and co are sure good at keeping stuff private when they want to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob Hartley coached 650 NHL games. If Bergevin is going for the experienced coach, the list isn't very long. Here is the short list of coaches with 650+ games coached and who have coached in the 2000s.

Pat Quinn 1400

Mike Keenan 1386

Jacques Lemaire 1262

Bryan Murray 1239

Marc Crawford 1152

Brian Sutter 1028

Andy Murray 738

Craig MacTavish 656

http://www.hockey-reference.com/coaches/NHL_stats.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Bergevin was euchred by Calgary, or if Hartley was never his preference to begin with? I gather Hartley has a prior relationship with Feaster, but on the other hand, I think the future in Montreal looks rather brighter than in Calgary, and if I'd been Hartley I'd have preferred to take the Montreal gig.

In any case, this seems to tilt us either toward my preferred scenario (Crawford) or my least-preferred scenario (Therrien). It's boom or bust I guess...unless Bergie has a third option up his sleeve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'The Chicoutimi Cucumber' timestamp='1338500148' post='451559']

I wonder if Bergevin was euchred by Calgary, or if Hartley was never his preference to begin with? I gather Hartley has a prior relationship with Feaster, but on the other hand, I think the future in Montreal looks rather brighter than in Calgary, and if I'd been Hartley I'd have preferred to take the Montreal gig.

CC- I don't think you can persume that Montreal was more desirable than Calgary for Hartley. Given the media circus in Montreal, I would think it might be easier to function as a coach in Calgary. I would also remind you that Calgary is drafting behind us, which would suggest that right now they are still better than us, Also, given the parody in the league, a quick turn around is in play as long as you are not strapped to onerous contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'The Chicoutimi Cucumber' timestamp='1338500148' post='451559']

I wonder if Bergevin was euchred by Calgary, or if Hartley was never his preference to begin with? I gather Hartley has a prior relationship with Feaster, but on the other hand, I think the future in Montreal looks rather brighter than in Calgary, and if I'd been Hartley I'd have preferred to take the Montreal gig.

CC- I don't think you can persume that Montreal was more desirable than Calgary for Hartley. Given the media circus in Montreal, I would think it might be easier to function as a coach in Calgary. I would also remind you that Calgary is drafting behind us, which would suggest that right now they are still better than us, Also, given the parody in the league, a quick turn around is in play as long as you are not strapped to onerous contracts.

You could be right about the two organizations...it is true that quick turnarounds are easier nowadays via the UFA markets, and I also think that adding the much-maligned Cammalleri (for next to nothing) helps them in pure hockey, if not contractual terms.I suppose I just think we've got more high-end young talent to build around, where Calgary seems to be trapped in 'bubble' purgatory with an aging core and no obvious next wave. Time'll tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could be right about the two organizations...it is true that quick turnarounds are easier nowadays via the UFA markets, and I also think that adding the much-maligned Cammalleri (for next to nothing) helps them in pure hockey, if not contractual terms.I suppose I just think we've got more high-end young talent to build around, where Calgary seems to be trapped in 'bubble' purgatory with an aging core and no obvious next wave. Time'll tell.

I can agree with that. I am not getting a real good feeling about the coaching situation. I am almost to the point where I would say go with the new blood, Roy, or the coach from Shawingan, or whoever as long as you back him up with veteran help. I think Robinson is almost a must now. I want to start to feel good about the coaching situation. Who do you like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is Terrien the front runner to get it? I think I'd rather rehire Martin, at least he's still on payroll. It's gotta be Crawford if it's down to those two.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would make for some intense rivalry if Roy is snubbed by the Habs and then becomes GM & coach of the next Nordiques generation. THat would be epic

it's written in the sky.

How is Terrien the front runner to get it? I think I'd rather rehire Martin, at least he's still on payroll. It's gotta be Crawford if it's down to those two.

I'd rather go with Carbo.

Bob Hartley coached 650 NHL games. If Bergevin is going for the experienced coach, the list isn't very long. Here is the short list of coaches with 650+ games coached and who have coached in the 2000s.

Pat Quinn 1400

Mike Keenan 1386

Jacques Lemaire 1262

Bryan Murray 1239

Marc Crawford 1152

Brian Sutter 1028

Andy Murray 738

Craig MacTavish 656

http://www.hockey-re.../NHL_stats.html

That list stinks.

How has Marc Crawford coached 1152 games!! wow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know the team has a smaller pool of talent to chose from when it's limited to francophone coaches. However, I find it interesting that the first coach hired in this years off season is French speaking, and was on our list. Hired by a team that could have taken anyone. It makes me laugh at the people who suggest the team doesn't put winning first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know the team has a smaller pool of talent to chose from when it's limited to francophone coaches. However, I find it interesting that the first coach hired in this years off season is French speaking, and was on our list. Hired by a team that could have taken anyone. It makes me laugh at the people who suggest the team doesn't put winning first.

And do you notice how the TSN experts are being so positive about the hire? Winning record, former Stanley Cup winner, etc, wonder how the news would have read if he were hired by Habs?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know the team has a smaller pool of talent to chose from when it's limited to francophone coaches. However, I find it interesting that the first coach hired in this years off season is French speaking, and was on our list. Hired by a team that could have taken anyone. It makes me laugh at the people who suggest the team doesn't put winning first.

I guess this is around about way of hinting that the best coach available was French speaking? You can laugh all you want, but there is no 1A and since we missed on Hartley we are now swimming in the shallow end. Personnally I don't even think Hartley was a one. Unfortunely, some of us take the coaching situation a lot more serious than you. We will be rewarded in success directly proportional to the success of this search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, few of us thought Hartley was a great choice to start with. So it can only be neurosis that suddenly makes us freak out now that he's off the market. I'll admit that, once I dug into his record a little more, I came around to the idea that he'd do a good job. Still, I don"t think we missed out on some coaching mastermind. What the Hartley hiring does show is the need for a certain speed in making this decision.

I like hankhab's point about media spin. If the Habs had hired Hartley, the same commentators would no doubt be incidentally positive, but the main focus would be on his frenchness, creating the implicit message that the Habs are second-rate because they have the wrong priorities. (This type of thing, which I see all the time, reflects, I'd argue, much deeper English-Canadian contempt for Quebecois concerns about language and culture - but that's a whole other story).

Assuming that obvious choices like Lemaire or Robinson aren't interested, it's pretty clear to me that Mark Crawford is the only remaining known commodity out there who has the qualifications and the chops to do right by us. Therrien is a dolt, Carbo is a retread who did a debatable job the first time, Martin's return would likely demoralize the players and re-ignite resentments from last season, Roy is rumoured to want more control than a position as coach would give him...and the rest seem to be junior/AHL coaches without the seasoned profile we tend to want.

I wonder if Bergevin has the inside track on somebody in the Chicago system, or some out-of-left field candidate nobody's mentioning? Maybe he wants someone in the Jersey or LA systems? Etc. Just spitballing. But really, it might be time to scan the lists of French-speaking AHL coaches. If we don't get Crawford, then that seems the most likely pipeline for our new coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From TSN (tweet on the main page) - decision is likely down to Therrien/Crawford, decision could come this weekend.

From RDS - Roy likely to get additional interview, may not yet be out of the running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is around about way of hinting that the best coach available was French speaking? You can laugh all you want, but there is no 1A and since we missed on Hartley we are now swimming in the shallow end. Personnally I don't even think Hartley was a one. Unfortunely, some of us take the coaching situation a lot more serious than you. We will be rewarded in success directly proportional to the success of this search.

I wasn't hinting at anything. The Flames thought the best coach available was a francophone. I guess my point is everyone should just chill. And how anyone can judge Bob Hartley's merits as a coach from their basement is beyond me. My personal belief? Players win championships. Last years cup, both coaches francophone, both we fired. The future is bright boys and girls.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't hinting at anything. The Flames thought the best coach available was a francophone. I guess my point is everyone should just chill. And how anyone can judge Bob Hartley's merits as a coach from their basement is beyond me. My personal belief? Players win championships. Last years cup, both coaches francophone, both we fired. The future is bright boys and girls.

It's an interesting question, how much of a difference coaches make. You look at a Sutter and what he's achieved in LA, you see the argument that coaching is key. But this is something of a rarity. If I had to analyze it, I'd say:

1. Most NHL-calibre coaches are basically interchangeable. They all preach sound systems, they are all adroit at the technical aspects of the game, they usually favour proven veterans in the pinch, they usually 'overcoach' in the sense of trying to micro-manage their talent and lines. They usually are respected by a good chunk of the room and disliked by some other portion of it. In other words, they're competent professionals who put the team in a position to succeed but don't necessarily manufacture victories with their brilliance.

2. Sometimes, a new coach is just what the doctor ordered and the team explodes. This doesn't mean that the new coach is intrinsically superior to other coaches out there - just that he is bringing a new message or a new style that the players were hungry for. This happened here when Demers replaced Burns. The whole team was tired of Burns and galvanized by his polar opposite, the affable, hyper-positive Demers. (A couple of years later, Demers was on the street, proving that he was really 'just another' good coach, albeit one in the right situation, rather than someone extraordinary). LA is probably benefitting from this effect right now. We missed a chance to enjoy this effect when we fired Martin and replaced him with a guy who refused to change the system.

3. There are a handful of elite coaches who are arguably at another level from (1) above. Dan Byslma, Joel Quennville, Jacques Lemaire come to mind as guys who seem not just to deliver solid results, but - at least periodically - to elevate their teams to another level. These guys are rare and none appear to be available at the moment. It's a fine line between (1) and (3), though; e.g., Hitchcock and Torterella may or may not deserve inclusion in this august group, and what do we do with guys like Ruff and Trotts, who benefit as much from low expectations and supportive ownership as from their own excellence?

4. There are bad coaches as well. Michel Therrien was more of a problem than an asset in both Pittsburgh and Montreal. Mario Tremblay was utterly unqualified and his team caved in under the pressure of his ego. Jean Perron lost the team and we basically won in 1986 on the internal leadership of Larry Robinson and Bob Gainey (truly a testament to those giants among men). Trent Yawney was a disaster in Chicago. I've never been convicned Bruce Boudreau is more than a clown.

Then there's the hard-to-classify scenario of a coach who may be quite good, but tends to cost the team assets in his quest to prove a point. We saw Carbo basically drive Perezhogin out of the league by bizarrely insisting that he be a third-line checker, and Martin expelling Lapierre, Lats and Sergei Kostitsyn because he wanted to change the culture. This sort of thing - trading talent for a coach - is what I worry about every time there's a coaching change.

In any case. the main thing is to avoid (4). If we pick someone like Crawford, we are safely in the territory of category (1), and that's fine with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't hinting at anything. The Flames thought the best coach available was a francophone. I guess my point is everyone should just chill. And how anyone can judge Bob Hartley's merits as a coach from their basement is beyond me. My personal belief? Players win championships. Last years cup, both coaches francophone, both we fired. The future is bright boys and girls.

If your theory was correct, there would be no need to ever change your coach and given the frequency that coaching changes are made, I would conclude that thirty teams don't agree with you. I believe this coaching decision will be huge. You are right, we don't have enough imformation to critique anyone, however as a fan we get what imformation we can and bnasically say who we like and don't like, based largely on past performance. As a fan, we have the right to put our two cents in, rightly or wrongly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't hinting at anything. The Flames thought the best coach available was a francophone. I guess my point is everyone should just chill. And how anyone can judge Bob Hartley's merits as a coach from their basement is beyond me. My personal belief? Players win championships. Last years cup, both coaches francophone, both we fired. The future is bright boys and girls.

Can i quote a post from someone named "Habsy" from a day or 2 ago.."the whole lanuage thing is ..ZZZZZZZZZZZ Boring!"

Funny eh?, or Ironic maybe how that dead horse now is fit to arise again. haha (no offense, just had to get that jab in there)

Sweet Jesus i hope Therrian is not the man. Maybe he would be fine, but he just seems a bit "out there" and even Crawford would be preferrable wouldnt he? But as with picking a GM i really dont have a clue who is most qualified.

We will see next week i guess?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to enjoy Friedman's thoughts. Thought someone might be interested:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/2012/06/lidstrom.html

7. Finally, this scenario reminds of Dean Lombardi/Darryl Sutter and Doug Armstrong/Ken Hitchcock. Under pressure, both bosses turned to the coach they knew best. The results were much better than predicted. There is no one Feaster knows and trusts more than Hartley, going back to their AHL days as hated rivals in Hershey (the GM) and Cornwall (the coach). Feaster joked at the media conference that if Hartley gets fired, his own bags will be packed, too. The Flames sure hope third time's a charm.

10. Montreal is getting close. So far, Marc Bergevin's hired people he knows very well (Rick Dudley, Scott Mellanby). Of those who are believed to be among the final candidates, the guy he knows best is Michel Therrien. It should be pointed out, though, that Marc Crawford apparently interviewed very well.

Link to comment
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.

Guest
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...