|
Post by CentreHice on Jun 15, 2014 13:23:28 GMT -5
Bingo! How many coaches have received a 4 year extension? Was MT going to turn down 3 years? Did he have somewhere else to go? Maybe it's 4 years at $50,000 a year. Then I'm good If there was no languge requirement, there is no job for MThead. Has always been the case with head coaching in Montreal. Remember how Cunneyworth was treated? Deplorable. Al MacNeil won a Stanley Cup in 1971 and still left because of the pressure H. Richard's "the worst coach I've ever played for/incompetent" comment generated in the Montreal media. I wonder if MT will still mess with P.K. once the huge contract is inked. He just seems like the type who lets power go to his head. Happy for him, in terms of his own income. But I still contend, he's the epitome of "show me a good goalie". As far as I'm concerned, our most valuable coaching asset has been Stephane Waite…..credit to MB for bringing him in.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 15, 2014 13:24:30 GMT -5
WE have recent evidence that Vigneault is the better ex-Hab coach. As GM, I would of grabbed Viggy as soon as he was let go and fired MThead. Cold? Sure. But it's about winning, not making friends.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 15, 2014 13:26:45 GMT -5
But I still contend, he's the epitome of "show me a good goalie". Absolutely. That and drill sergeant. Things will go down in a hurry if PK and Price turn against him.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 15, 2014 14:08:42 GMT -5
I don't like Therrien mainly because he's a coach who lets his own personnal agenda take over... likes to carry vengeance over players even if it's not for the good of the team...
...but...
Results over 2 years speak for themselves. Sure he's got a good goalie but so does Vigneault, Suter, Quenneville, Julien and all other coaches with competitive out there. Why is that a knock particularitly against Therrien? As well, can anyone honnestly say he's been given a full hand by Berg? (Brière, Bourque, Moen, Parros, Armstrong, Bouillon, Murray, Drewiski, Halpern...) more like a revolving door of mediocrity... and yet he's made the best out of it... at the end of the year, Berg finally came through with some meaningful acquisitions (Vanek, Weise, Weaver) and Therrien took the team the conference final... as well for all the flak about not develloping young players, in 2 years, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Bournival, Beaulieu, Tokarski, Tinordi all saw some valuable playing time, despite his GM filing up the roster to the rim with veterans on NHL contract...
Again, not my favorite guy... but he's done some good and can handle the pressure cooker. As for the lenght... bah... nobody believes he'll see the end of it behind the bench, but that's just Molson's money at stake...
|
|
|
Post by Disp on Jun 15, 2014 19:47:11 GMT -5
WE have recent evidence that Vigneault is the better ex-Hab coach. As GM, I would of grabbed Viggy as soon as he was let go and fired MThead. Cold? Sure. But it's about winning, not making friends. And by now most would have turned on him too. Couldn't win with the nucks, only hired cause he's french, doesn't play kids enough, etc.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 15, 2014 21:25:37 GMT -5
I wouldn't have looked to the past at all. I can't sit here and list off all the assistant coaches out there, but I'd have been making a short list of ones with teams that were successful. I'd have also had Dom Ducharme on my list, even if it's to get him in as an assistant. This guy will be coaching in the NHL. He knows how to coach young players. He knows how to coach highly skilled young players. He knows how to win.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jun 15, 2014 21:53:21 GMT -5
now if Lefebvre gets a four year extension . . .
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 15, 2014 22:51:22 GMT -5
I don't like Therrien mainly because he's a coach who lets his own personnal agenda take over... likes to carry vengeance over players even if it's not for the good of the team... ...but... Results over 2 years speak for themselves. Sure he's got a good goalie but so does Vigneault, Suter, Quenneville, Julien and all other coaches with competitive out there. Why is that a knock particularitly against Therrien? As well, can anyone honnestly say he's been given a full hand by Berg? (Brière, Bourque, Moen, Parros, Armstrong, Bouillon, Murray, Drewiski, Halpern...) more like a revolving door of mediocrity... and yet he's made the best out of it... at the end of the year, Berg finally came through with some meaningful acquisitions (Vanek, Weise, Weaver) and Therrien took the team the conference final... as well for all the flak about not develloping young players, in 2 years, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Bournival, Beaulieu, Tokarski, Tinordi all saw some valuable playing time, despite his GM filing up the roster to the rim with veterans on NHL contract... Again, not my favorite guy... but he's done some good and can handle the pressure cooker. As for the lenght... bah... nobody believes he'll see the end of it behind the bench, but that's just Molson's money at stake... I just don't get along with people like Therrien ... I gave the guy credit bringing the team as far as he did ... so, while I don't like him, I do respect him and what he's accomplished ... there have been some good young players join the club in the last two years ... hopefully there's room to get a bit younger next year, too ... one thing that impressed me about Bergevin ... he was very honest and practical in his post-season conference ... he knows the team has to address some areas of concern if its to become a bonafide contender ... he provided Therrien with the tools to get as far as he did ... the team overachieved, sure, but it's not like the last conference run ... that team was nowhere near as good as this one is ... Cheers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2014 23:31:50 GMT -5
Therrien isn't my favourite person either, but you don't have to like who your boss is in order to work for him.
I don't imagine the Kings' players are huge fans of Darryl Sutter, but as long as he wins championships I don't imagine they mind it too much (nor Kings' fans).
Therrien did a much better job at press conferences these playoffs compared to last season when he was sounding off about Paul MacLean. Julien tried some head games and Michel didn't bite. I don't know if the players rallying around the team was the result of Therrien, or if they figured it out on their own. Either way, if you compare to way the players treated each playoff game this year, they seemed much more tightly knit than in years past.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 15, 2014 23:38:47 GMT -5
I wouldn't have looked to the past at all. I can't sit here and list off all the assistant coaches out there, but I'd have been making a short list of ones with teams that were successful. I'd have also had Dom Ducharme on my list, even if it's to get him in as an assistant. This guy will be coaching in the NHL. He knows how to coach young players. He knows how to coach highly skilled young players. He knows how to win. Which is exactly why Therrien would never have him on staff. It's way too dangerous to have your replacement conveniently available.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 15, 2014 23:39:55 GMT -5
now if Lefebvre gets a four year extension . . . I'd give him an extension. Right up......
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 16, 2014 5:50:07 GMT -5
I wouldn't have looked to the past at all. I can't sit here and list off all the assistant coaches out there, but I'd have been making a short list of ones with teams that were successful. I'd have also had Dom Ducharme on my list, even if it's to get him in as an assistant. This guy will be coaching in the NHL. He knows how to coach young players. He knows how to coach highly skilled young players. He knows how to win. Which is exactly why Therrien would never have him on staff. It's way too dangerous to have your replacement conveniently available. Well, I never said the coach in that scenario would be Therrien (as I wouldn't have looked to the past). An assistant coach like Ducharme, in that situation, is just as likely - if not more - to get offers from other clubs. If a head coach is worried about looking over his shoulders at his assistants, he's not long for this world. Hire the best people. Period.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 16, 2014 8:16:29 GMT -5
As weird as it sounds, it is possible to overrate the importance of the playoffs.
Is a 17-game sample more significant than an 82-game sample? Does it tell you more about what kind of team you have than the regular season? My answer is typically NO. The regular season gives you more information about the players, the the system, the talent, the coaches, etc. An 82-game seasom will typically smooth out the ups and downs, statistical aberrations, and I think the true professionals are the ones that can deliver the goods all year long and not just in the playoffs.
So it's a long-winded way of saying that, despite a 1st place finish in 2013, a 100-point season this year and a trip to the conference finals.... I have no idea what we are as a team. We were a dynamic possession-oriented team in 2013 but faded down the stretch and in the playoffs. Then we did a complete 180 this year and were one of the worst possession and even strength teams in the whole league, but we were able to smooth it out with stellar goaltending and a late season surge after the Vanek acquisition.
My hope and prayer is that the playoffs made MT realize how this team needs to play in order to be successful. That they need to play more like they did in MT's first year on the job as opposed to this past year. But we were bailed out in the playoffs by guys like Eller and Bourque, two guys who had miserable seasons, and I for one don't have much confidence that they can produce over 82 games.
So I can see why MB has confidence to give Therrien the extension, but I'm still at a loss to figure out what our identity is as a team and what to expect next season.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jun 16, 2014 8:32:58 GMT -5
I have no issues with the extension....it really means nothing in the big picture. He can be fired in November if it comes down to it. As far as the cost, it has no effect on the team. Also, like said here already, it shows that the Canadiens are first class when it comes to supporting its staff and that can only help us attract top talent for the coaching staff and front office.
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Jun 16, 2014 9:51:59 GMT -5
Well, to develop players you have to create room and that is not MT's job but rather MB's. MB went on and aquired veterans to create competition within the team and Therrien had to manage everyone's play time for the best on the ice and in the room. Now, if Tinordi, Beaulieu or both had demonstrated they were clearly above Bouillon and Murray MB should have made room on the roster. I don't think any of the two rookies CLEARLY demonstrated that they were a better option on the short term. Yes they've shown flashes suggesting they would eventually get there but right in the middle of the season when each and every point is crucial for the team making the playoff I can certainly understand why management is hesitant to move veterans in order to "develop" rookies.
And as for the comments MT made on 24CH about the team being a "grinding" team, I wouldn't put too much weight into that. Clearly it was an attempt at waking up the players and making them more engaged in one on one battles. We can all argue with the words being used but its hard to argue with the results. At the end of the day the team reached the conference final and could have very well gone further if Price didn't get injured.
Like it or not, MT is part of the management team and as such is entitled to some credit. The fact that the team can count on a world class goaltender doesn't remove any credit from him. Was credit taken away from Babcock for having the best defensemen of his generation and one of the top two way forward of his generation when winning the cup with the Wings? I don't think so.
At the end of the day, I agree that some criticism of MT may be warranted. However, I don't buy into the "he is a terrible coach" argument. His record shows otherwise and now that Bylsma got fired after failing to advance in the playoffs since their Cup, people may realize that MT probably had something to do with the Cup the Penguins win. After that year, the Pens didn't even come close to repeating and that is despite having arguably 2 of the top 5 centremen in the NHL that would be considered "franchise" player on all NHL rosters.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 16, 2014 11:40:42 GMT -5
Now, if Tinordi, Beaulieu or both had demonstrated they were clearly above Bouillon and Murray MB should have made room on the roster. I don't think any of the two rookies CLEARLY demonstrated that they were a better option on the short term. Yes they've shown flashes suggesting they would eventually get there but right in the middle of the season when each and every point is crucial for the team making the playoff I can certainly understand why management is hesitant to move veterans in order to "develop" rookies. Well, Murray and Cube were pretty bad at various times throughout the year. Horrible, in fact. And there's where the difference of opinion arises. I would have played both Tinordi and Beaulieu more. Perhaps not a lot more, but I said throughout the season that Cube should only play one out of every two games. Why not rotate them? There may have been CAP issues that I'm not aware of, but from a pure talent point of view that made a lot of sense to me. The young guys get more ice time at a level at which they need to adapt, the old guys get more rest and its a win/win. But Therrien went with his juniour buddy and with the big body who couldn't make a pass to save his life. And the team ran out of gas when it was most important. This isn't hindsight, as I was saying it during the regular season. It just made sense. And to be fair, CAP issues may have played a role, or not.
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Jun 16, 2014 12:45:35 GMT -5
Respected veterans will always want to play every games and will not accept a situation where they have to rotate with a rookie. This is where I believe it was up to Bergevin, not Therrien, to create room for Beaulieu or/and Tinordi. Having said that, aside for some flashes, neither of them elevated their game to force Bergevin's hand during the regular season.
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Jun 16, 2014 12:57:30 GMT -5
So just to make my opinion clear, I don't disagree that Murray and to a lesser extent, Bouillon showed they were at the end of the road. What I argue is that the rookies didn't do enough to force Bergevin's hand. MT will play the horses Bergevin gives him and will not risk losing the room by playing a tentative rookie with potential but still mistake prone over a veteran that may be making mistakes or is no longer able to keep up but proved over the years his worth at the NHL level. Right or wrong, this will not happen and not only with Therrien but with 99% of coaches out there.
Now if the rookie is CLEARLY a better option as it became evident during the playoffs, then obviously it is a different story.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 18, 2014 18:55:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 18, 2014 20:33:15 GMT -5
Now, if Tinordi, Beaulieu or both had demonstrated they were clearly above Bouillon and Murray MB should have made room on the roster. I don't think any of the two rookies CLEARLY demonstrated that they were a better option on the short term. Yes they've shown flashes suggesting they would eventually get there but right in the middle of the season when each and every point is crucial for the team making the playoff I can certainly understand why management is hesitant to move veterans in order to "develop" rookies. Well, Murray and Cube were pretty bad at various times throughout the year. Horrible, in fact. And there's where the difference of opinion arises. I would have played both Tinordi and Beaulieu more. Perhaps not a lot more, but I said throughout the season that Cube should only play one out of every two games. Why not rotate them? There may have been CAP issues that I'm not aware of, but from a pure talent point of view that made a lot of sense to me. The young guys get more ice time at a level at which they need to adapt, the old guys get more rest and its a win/win. But Therrien went with his juniour buddy and with the big body who couldn't make a pass to save his life. And the team ran out of gas when it was most important. This isn't hindsight, as I was saying it during the regular season. It just made sense. And to be fair, CAP issues may have played a role, or not. Each player has a unique contribution to make. The cube brings experience, skating, the odd hit. If his minutes are limited he can catch his breath and carry the puck out of our end. Murray cal clear the slot and knock down power forwards like none of our other D men can. He is slow and shouldn't be called on to contribute big minutes but in certain situations his contributions are valueable. Tinordi is big and has a wide reach. He is hard to get around. Beaulieu is young, fast and can carry the puck. It is hard to compare them as each one shines in specific situations and none is called upon to play big minutes.
|
|
|
Post by habsask on Jun 19, 2014 17:18:39 GMT -5
I don't like Therrien mainly because he's a coach who lets his own personnal agenda take over... likes to carry vengeance over players even if it's not for the good of the team... ...but... Results over 2 years speak for themselves. Sure he's got a good goalie but so does Vigneault, Suter, Quenneville, Julien and all other coaches with competitive out there. Why is that a knock particularitly against Therrien? As well, can anyone honnestly say he's been given a full hand by Berg? (Brière, Bourque, Moen, Parros, Armstrong, Bouillon, Murray, Drewiski, Halpern...) more like a revolving door of mediocrity... and yet he's made the best out of it... at the end of the year, Berg finally came through with some meaningful acquisitions (Vanek, Weise, Weaver) and Therrien took the team the conference final... as well for all the flak about not develloping young players, in 2 years, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Bournival, Beaulieu, Tokarski, Tinordi all saw some valuable playing time, despite his GM filing up the roster to the rim with veterans on NHL contract... Again, not my favorite guy... but he's done some good and can handle the pressure cooker. As for the lenght... bah... nobody believes he'll see the end of it behind the bench, but that's just Molson's money at stake... Good post Doc - & those are about my feelings as well. And he's got Subban to buy in to the team first approach that is the bedrock of Bergevin's rebuild efforts. Not too shabby.
|
|