Jump to content

Ducharme Fired


Commandant
 Share

Recommended Posts

He's done a hell of a job with Tampa's prospects.  I'd want to know what type of stuff this is too. 

 

Cause if its coaching or relations with players, I think he's shown that he's grown and improved as a coach between Rochester and Syracuse and that wouldn't concern me. 

 

If its something problematic off-ice (read immoral or illegal) that might give me pause though 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this funny because my 1st reaction was surprise and I was upset but then I quickly changed my mind.

 

The Habs brass have basically written this entire year off and changing the coach could change that.  ex:  unmotivated players like Petry might be inspired by a different coach and start playing normal again; which could mess up getting a top 5 draft pick.  Thats probably why they took so long to fire DD.

 

Then I realized that changing the coach now could be a good thing because they will see if the unmotivated players like Petry can become motivated again.  If Petry and the others are still playing poorly the GM will know who to get rid of in the offseason.  It should help them figure out who they should keep.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeLassister said:

Coaching stuff, relation with players stuff or  hockey unrelated stuff ?

 

First two, nothing from an off-ice/legal perspective.  While his reputation is as a progressive-minded good communicator, he's closer to another Michel Therrien clone than a lot of people realize.

 

As for development of Tampa's prospects, there are a few but most of his good years have come from when he had some veteran guys leading the way (which, granted, isn't abnormal for the AHL).  Cirelli was there for one year and while Verhaeghe did well there, it took until he left Tampa Bay to become an NHL regular.  Most of the other young guys he has had that have turned into NHLers have been depth guys (Joseph, Volkov, Stephens, Colton, even Foote has developed slower than expected and is a depth piece).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Really good article, behind pay wall:

 

<<In his first one-on-one interview since being fired by the Canadiens last February, Ducharme said he never had a discussion with Jeff Gorton and Kent Hughes regarding how he should proceed in managing the season after a catastrophic start. >>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the article. It's good ... the key takeaway, as Alfredo says, is that Gorton (Hughes was hired only a few weeks before Ducharme was fired) never reached out to Ducharme to tell him whether he should try to win or focus on developing young players.  It seems that Bergevin, too, was guilty of that and didn't provide any direction in the first two months of the season, before being replaced himself.

 

Quote

Ducharme said he never had a discussion with Jeff Gorton and Kent Hughes regarding how he should proceed in managing the season after a catastrophic start. The two new heads of the organization never sent that message, and Ducharme says he didn’t feel he had the authority to decide on his own that winning games was no longer important.

 

So yes, you can question the wisdom of all those decisions, but Ducharme was making them, for better or for worse, based on what he believed to be his mandate. What he believed to be his mandate was not how his new bosses viewed things.

 

As for the Gorton communication, I think the question I would have for Ducharme is why would he not have asked for a meeting himself. He doesn't say in the story that he was refused a meeting, only that Gorton never sent him the message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I read the article. It's good ... the key takeaway, as Alfredo says, is that Gorton (Hughes was hired only a few weeks before Ducharme was fired) never reached out to Ducharme to tell him whether he should try to win or focus on developing young players.  It seems that Bergevin, too, was guilty of that and didn't provide any direction in the first two months of the season, before being replaced himself.

 

 

As for the Gorton communication, I think the question I would have for Ducharme is why would he not have asked for a meeting himself. He doesn't say in the story that he was refused a meeting, only that Gorton never sent him the message.

Yeah, I can’t imagine a coach not initialing that type of discussion.

I’ve been in roles many times where a VP has been fired. I always initiated a discussion on ensuring we were aligned on priorities.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. It might not have helped if Gorton had his mind made up. But it shows a certain level of naivete to not check in with your manager to find out what you should be doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually, fired coaches wait until they aren't being paid by the team that fired them to complain.

 

Anyway, I think everyone knew the writing was on the wall for Ducharme. When does an incoming GM keep the coaching staff in place on a floundering team? I guess I was surprised they didn't let the season finish with Ducharme, but ultimately, I'm glad they didn't, given just how Caufield's season did a complete 180.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, huzer said:

Usually, fired coaches wait until they aren't being paid by the team that fired them to complain.

 

Anyway, I think everyone knew the writing was on the wall for Ducharme. When does an incoming GM keep the coaching staff in place on a floundering team? I guess I was surprised they didn't let the season finish with Ducharme, but ultimately, I'm glad they didn't, given just how Caufield's season did a complete 180.

 

When the veterans aren’t performing, your best prospect isn’t performing, and zero changes in approach are made, you definitely have a coaching issue.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I read the article. It's good ... the key takeaway, as Alfredo says, is that Gorton (Hughes was hired only a few weeks before Ducharme was fired) never reached out to Ducharme to tell him whether he should try to win or focus on developing young players. 

 

Haha well considering that we were neither winning nor focusing on developing young players, I guess Ducharme could have just picked one.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Neech said:

 

Haha well considering that we were neither winning nor focusing on developing young players, I guess Ducharme could have just picked one.

 

Lmao

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly DD was in a tough spot

 

- following a SC final appearance

- loss of Price, Weber, Danault and many others 

 

then,

 

- new management team

- loss of player confidence

 

but - I don’t think he doesn’t himself any favours when he shares what he did in that article. Foolish for him to think we all know HE could have gone to Gorts. Sure Gorts should have taken initiative (and who knows that he didn’t!), but DD can’t be cryin’ ‘I didn’t know what to do!’ When it was on HIM to either right the ship or find out his new mandate. 
 

I’ve lost a little more or the little respect I had for DD. 
 

(Tho I love the candor he gave us in the article! But I love it from a drama perspective, not a respect perspective)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

When the veterans aren’t performing, your best prospect isn’t performing, and zero changes in approach are made, you definitely have a coaching issue.


Amen to this common sense.

 

The man was dealt a bad hand, but he was also in way over his head. 
 

If I were running another org, I’d consider him for an assistant coaching gig based on the premise that he would have learned a great deal from his quite extreme Montreal experience. But it will likely take years before he is considered for an NHL head coaching gig again - if ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2022 at 4:49 PM, revvvrob said:

Clearly DD was in a tough spot

 

- following a SC final appearance

- loss of Price, Weber, Danault and many others 

 

then,

 

- new management team

- loss of player confidence

 

but - I don’t think he doesn’t himself any favours when he shares what he did in that article. Foolish for him to think we all know HE could have gone to Gorts. Sure Gorts should have taken initiative (and who knows that he didn’t!), but DD can’t be cryin’ ‘I didn’t know what to do!’ When it was on HIM to either right the ship or find out his new mandate. 
 

I’ve lost a little more or the little respect I had for DD. 
 

(Tho I love the candor he gave us in the article! But I love it from a drama perspective, not a respect perspective)

 

I agree, DD didn't do himself any favours with this article.  It won't help him get hired somewhere else.

 

He was in a tough spot, was dealt a lemon and didn't make lemonade.  I think HuGo said when they came on that they intended to have DD finish the year but when they had a chance to examine closely the situation they realized a change had to be made. 

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...