|
Post by seventeen on Nov 9, 2014 13:48:38 GMT -5
Here's an interesting piece from HabsLoyalist, asking if one is to improve at all positions, why should coaching be any different? If the opportunity arises, does one proceed? I believe there's history for this, but it takes guts. IN the 2008-09 season, Denis Savard was fired after 4 games and a poor start. Quenneville was available after being let go by Colorado. The difference in this case is that Savard missed the playoffs the previous 2 years. the Chicago team had a pretty good line-up but was underperforming. Savad lost 3 of the first 4 games and Quenneville was hired, leading the team to a .643 record and was eliminated in round 3 of the SC playoffs. Therrien's record is pretty good, but if an A-1 proven coach came along, would you make the change? Good question. Don't ask me because my answer is too obvious. habsloyalist.blogspot.ca/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00-11:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00-11:00&max-results=2 System Upgrade Imagine you run a hockey team and your number-one centre is a decent player who puts up 60 points a year, doesn't take many dumb penalties and wins more faceoffs than he loses. You'd probably be happy enough with that guy. Then, imagine it's free agent time and a big, strong centre who dominates on the draw, skates like the wind and puts up 80 points a year hits the market. You have cap space enough to sign him, but if you do, you then have too many centres on your team. So, you have a decision to make. Do you trade your 60-point man and sign the new guy, or do you let the 80-point guy go to the leafs because you don't have a roster spot available for him? Assuming the more productive player isn't a jerk, most of us would go for the upgrade.
It's the same for any position on a team. If Dustin Tokarski is ready to play, you trade Peter Budaj. If Daniel Briere isn't productive, you move him and bring in P.A.Parenteau instead. If you can somehow acquire Thomas Vanek at the deadline, you go for it. Marc Bergevin's job is to make sure he's got the best person available in every position because a team only gets better by wisely and opportunistically upgrading its personnel.
That mindset should be the same for coaching staff. The old saying that a coach is "hired to be fired" is inevitably true for every guy behind the bench, whether he lasts a year like Tortorella in Vancouver or fifteen like Barry Trotz in Nashville. Sooner or later coaches get fired, and most of the time it's because their teams aren't getting results. Rarely does a team can a coach just because there's a better option available, but perhaps they'd be better off if they did. At least they'd be choosing an upgrade versus dumping an underperformer or scapegoat mid-season and being stuck with whomever is available at that time.
There's a chance Mike Babcock and the Detroit Red Wings will part ways this summer. The rumour mill says the coach wants more money and team management doesn't want to pay it. Of course, there's also the fact that the Wings core is aging and they're no longer perennial contenders. Or Babcock may simply want to rejuvenate his career by taking on a new team whose Cup window is just about to open. One thing is certain: if Babcock becomes available, Marc Bergevin should court him.
Michel Therrien was hired for a second go-round behind the Habs bench because Bergevin was a brand-new GM who needed an experienced coach. He was also one of the few francophone options available. In his time as Canadiens coach, the team has achieved some good results, winning their division in the lockout-shortened 2012-13 season and making the Eastern Conference final in last year's playoffs. Even so, the Canadiens powerplay is dreadful and its possession stats alarming. If they'd made the Finals last year, they would have been crushed by the Kings. They don't score much, and they allow much too much pressure on Carey Price. The coach's insistence on overusing veterans who don't produce and limiting the minutes of young players who do is not a great winning strategy. Nor is benching some players for making mistakes and forgiving others.
Of course, no coach is perfect and the scrutiny Montreal's coach receives exposes his flaws in a way most of his colleagues don't experience. Therrien isn't a terrible coach. He's also not the best in the league. He makes mistakes, but so does every other coach. The question Bergevin needs to answer is, if there's a better option available, which may happen this summer, will he be willing to replace Therrien, even if his results aren't terrible? If he's the proactive GM the Canadiens need to build the best team possible, he must consider it.
Babcock is a rock star in the coaching ranks. He comes from an organization that knows how to win. He's got a Stanely Cup, two Finals appearances, a World Championship and two Olympic gold medals on his resume. He's consistently coached the Wings to playoff berths and kept them competitive even when dealing with injury and retirements. This is the kind of coach the Montreal Canadiens deserve.
Michel Therrien deserves some respect as a guy who's coached more than 600 NHL games. Yet, if there's a chance to hire someone who's had more success at his position, the Habs would be wrong not to explore that. These are the Montreal Canadiens, not the Columbus Blue Jackets. Habs fans have been waiting for 22 years for a Stanley Cup win, and they're tired of hoping in vain. Part of creating a winner is making sure every position is filled with the best possible person. That includes the coach.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Nov 9, 2014 14:00:03 GMT -5
I think we continually win in spite of our head coach, not because of. If we can see his inabilities, you can be sure others do. Failure to adjust in-game. Failure to see the dead weight and do something. But, things won't change enough if the criteria for hiring requires applicants to be francophone. We will continually put ourselves behind the 8 ball. I'm not going to make this about English coaches being better. That's not my point. The limiting of the pool from which we pick our coaches from is. If Scotty Bowman were coaching today, we wouldn't hire him because he doesn't speak French. Do those 70s teams win 4 in a row without him? Hard to say. I think it's less likely. IMO, he's the best coach in the history of the game; a master motivator and master tactician. I want today's version of that coach.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 9, 2014 16:39:43 GMT -5
Scotty Bowman was fluently bilingual ... I'll probably be unpopular with this opinion, but if Therrien wants to keep Bourque out of the lineup he can play two cards ... first, he's given Bourque enough games to prove himself and he hasn't ... secondly, Sekac has sat out a lot of games and he kept himself ready to go at any time ... I don't think we've seen the end of Rene Bourque ... don't know where I'd put him, I just hope he doesn't take a job away from Sekac ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Nov 9, 2014 18:05:25 GMT -5
Scotty Bowman was fluently bilingual ... I'll probably be unpopular with this opinion, but if Therrien wants to keep Bourque out of the lineup he can play two cards ... first, he's given Bourque enough games to prove himself and he hasn't ... secondly, Sekac has sat out a lot of games and he kept himself ready to go at any time ... I don't think we've seen the end of Rene Bourque ... don't know where I'd put him, I just hope he doesn't take a job away from Sekac ... Cheers. Never fear, he won't displace Sekac.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Nov 9, 2014 20:10:52 GMT -5
For all Therrien's faults, he is media savvy when it comes to handling the French media. Babcock would not survive just because of that, and that's why MB will not hire him. If I was MB, I'd take the Billy Beane approach to handling MT. You aren't going to play the young guys I drafted / acquired, I'll trade the guys you keep trying to play.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 9, 2014 20:26:52 GMT -5
If I was MB, I'd take the Billy Beane approach to handling MT. You aren't going to play the young guys I drafted / acquired, I'll trade the guys you keep trying to play. Or waive them and send them to Hamilton.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Nov 9, 2014 20:40:49 GMT -5
Scotty Bowman was fluently bilingual ... I'll probably be unpopular with this opinion, but if Therrien wants to keep Bourque out of the lineup he can play two cards ... first, he's given Bourque enough games to prove himself and he hasn't ... secondly, Sekac has sat out a lot of games and he kept himself ready to go at any time ... I don't think we've seen the end of Rene Bourque ... don't know where I'd put him, I just hope he doesn't take a job away from Sekac ... Cheers. My mistake. I don't ever recall an interview/film where he spoke French. I assumed. I was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by 24andcounting on Nov 9, 2014 20:41:50 GMT -5
Babcock coming to the Habs would be incredible. If Molson truly wants to win, then he should put the best product on the ice (and behind the bench). So let's drop this French first mentality and go with the qualified candidate.
Fat chance though. Didn't Therrien just sign an extension?
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 9, 2014 20:55:01 GMT -5
There's been no real explanation for why Bourque's leash was so long, and I don't think we're going to get one. When Sekac was asked after the game yesterday about what he did to keep positive for a possible return he gave an unusual answer. Like many Euros, he probably won't endear himself to MT. He didn't use the normal cliches - " I just tried to stay ready, knowing I'd have to be ready when my coach was ready to use me." He didn't really answer the question. He talked more about his play after he was dressed again, than his attitude while he was benched. Which was probably a good idea. I don't think he knows why he was benched. He was asked if MT had provided any feedback for him after his good play. His answer (like all good Euros) "He hasn't talked to me" (brutally honest) "but if they weren't happy with my play, I'm sure they would have said something". Seems to me that MT still hasn't learned some basic communication techniques, speech for instance. I've been in management a long time and I can admit I wasn't very good for longer than I'd like to think. I was ok, but I could have been so much better, much earlier. I've learned a lot, and I can see things that Therrien doesn't do that are good basic tactics. Anyway, as Habsloyalist says above, Therrien isn't a bad coach, he's just not one of the better coaches around. Why would you not want to upgrade at that position, as much as first line centre, or any other player position? Especially since there are no CAP implications (even if there are profitability implications).
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 9, 2014 23:39:38 GMT -5
Babcock coming to the Habs would be incredible. If Molson truly wants to win, then he should put the best product on the ice (and behind the bench). So let's drop this French first mentality and go with the qualified candidate. Fat chance though. Didn't Therrien just sign an extension? Not only does "Bourque on waivers" send the message that a player's roster spot isn't safe if he's continuously under-performing….but the coaching staff should heed the same message….even if it comes to convincing the bilingual head coach adherents that winning is the universal language. And so, MT and staff hopefully strive even harder to pick up their games. Could happen…
|
|
|
Post by del on Nov 10, 2014 0:15:43 GMT -5
We fans were pretty sure MB was going to extend Therrien as a reward for the series run last year. Most of us felt 2 years would be fair? But MB signed him to 4 and we all question why? MB must have projected which Francophones coaches in the NHL currently coaching would be available to him after Therriens contract expires. A 4 year deal tells me that MB does not think anyone better than Therrien will be available after the next two years. Hartley and Vigneault will probably be resigned and I think an anglophone coach is still absolutely out the question. He must also feel that any francophone coach in the AHL is not ready to make the jump to handle the Habs.
IOW I think MB has thought this coaching position out in detail and simply arrived at the conclusion that he'll wait and see what's available after 4 more years and not worry about who becomes available within that4 year window. For now, Therrien stays whether a Babcock or a Babcock clone is available or not......at least that's the way I see it. Case closed....next case...you say your neighbour ran over your cat and you want a new dog? get outta here....next!
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 10, 2014 3:34:08 GMT -5
The only situation where a solely English speaking coach would be acceptable is if he comes with the resume that Babcock provides. Just sayin.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Nov 10, 2014 7:54:01 GMT -5
...but the coaching staff should heed the same message….even if it comes to convincing the bilingual head coach adherents that winning is the universal language. That's kind of the fatal flaw in the "fire Therrien" logic though, isn't it? They don't ask how, they ask how many, and frankly speaking Therrien has been racking up the "how manys" ever since he got here. He took a last place team to first in the division, and people complained it was only because of the lockout. So the next year he took that team to the Eastern Conference Finals. This year he has the team sitting 3rd overall in the conference, FIFTH overall in the league. You can say it's all Carey, or the bubble can't last, or this, or that, but this is a results driven league and Therrien has the results. The team is 85-46-14 since he took over. I can't be bothered to do the research, but I would have to think that is right up there with the best coaching records in the league over the last three seasons. I don't want to come across as a Therrien apologist, because I'm really not a huge fan of his. But by the same token I just want the team to win, and that seems to be happening a lot more often than not ever since Therrien was hired. At some point we're just going to have to give him the benefit of the doubt, if only begrudgingly.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Nov 10, 2014 9:25:04 GMT -5
I don't want to come across as a Therrien apologist, because I'm really not a huge fan of his. But by the same token I just want the team to win, and that seems to be happening a lot more often than not ever since Therrien was hired. At some point we're just going to have to give him the benefit of the doubt, if only begrudgingly. boy I hate to agree with you on this, but I have to agree with you on this. It may or may not be known that I don't like MT or his coaching acumen/style/ personality choices . . . but he is getting results. Ask me I'd prefer a coach I like or a coach that will lead the team to win a Cup . . . you know what I'd chose! Yes, a good goalie makes a good coach, but we can't dump the coach just because the goalie is good (rats). We're stuck with MT for good or bad (or for bad or bad) as long as the team wins. And I am going to try (no guarantees) to suck it up if he continues to do the job.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 10, 2014 10:16:15 GMT -5
I'm not saying "Fire Therrien" at all. But even contending teams make a switch if results aren't up to expectations.
MT also developed and took the talent-laden Penguins to the Finals in 07-08…only to be fired the next season after going 27-25-5.
The Pens, with Bylsma, went 18-3-0-4 the rest of the way….then 16-8 to the Cup. 34-11-0-4 after the coaching change that season.
And now Bylsma is gone.
Sure, we have the language issue which makes it difficult to make such a change if there isn't another bilingual coach ready to fill the spot…..but it does happen, and if Therrien's results start to fall below the team's capability…he should be wary.
A 28th place, 7.7% powerplay with our talent isn't a mark in MT's favour at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Nov 10, 2014 10:18:33 GMT -5
Didn't we try to waive bourque last year?
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 10, 2014 11:32:22 GMT -5
Yes, a good goalie makes a good coach, but we can't dump the coach just because the goalie is good (rats). Generally speaking, I find the-coach-is-only-as-good-as-his-goaltender-makes-him-out-to-be, to be too convenient phrased used to find fault with the coach ... don't get me wrong, I think it applied to our club in the recent past, but I don't find it accurate a lot of times ... sometimes it can be a reflection of not having a competitive lineup and that falls a lot with the GM ... in Therrien's case I don't think he iced the best lineup he could, but by giving Bourque all the chances in the world to make the team was probably the best thing he could do before waiving the oft-listless winger ... by doing this Bourque now knows, himself, that he really doesn't have an argument for being put on waivers ... Sekac has done his time in the press box and kept himself ready to go ... this represents an upgrade for sure ... however, WD recently asked a question about Gerard Gallant ... I thought letting him go wasn't the best of decisions but there seems to be an unwritten rule about allowing teams permission to talk to assistant coach's ... I think that, there, might have taken away from Therrien's effectiveness, maybe more so than a hot goalie ... that's just me, though ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Nov 10, 2014 11:39:30 GMT -5
Babcock coming to the Habs would be incredible. If Molson truly wants to win, then he should put the best product on the ice (and behind the bench). So let's drop this French first mentality and go with the qualified candidate. Fat chance though. Didn't Therrien just sign an extension? Not only does "Bourque on waivers" send the message that a player's roster spot isn't safe if he's continuously under-performing….but the coaching staff should heed the same message….even if it comes to convincing the bilingual head coach adherents that winning is the universal language. And so, MT and staff hopefully strive even harder to pick up their games. Could happen… What's the point of talking about Babcock? We all know he's going to Toronto.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 10, 2014 11:42:13 GMT -5
A 28th place, 7.7% powerplay with our talent isn't a mark in MT's favour at the moment. Here's another area where I think we're missing Gerard Gallant ... both he and Clement Jodoin handled the power play last season ... Florida's PP currently ranks 22nd at 14.3% ... that's not outstanding by any means, but it's better than us at 28th, 7.7% ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Nov 10, 2014 12:33:42 GMT -5
You have to let it play out, but for now Therrien deserves the benefit of the doubt. As BC said, his won-loss record since he got here is actually pretty good. I would say there have been some disturbing underlying trends, mainly our declining even-strength production and poor possession metrics, but the W's are all that really count.
I will say this is the most talented the Habs have been under the MB/MT regime and expectations are justifiably high. IMO, anything less than 100 points and a top 4 seed in the East will be a disappointment. Berg likes to publicly downplay expectations and say stuff like "our main goal is to make the playoffs" but that's just to cover his downside. I would still put us a step below Pittsburgh and Boston in the East, but we are right at the next level of "very good" teams and should be locks for a top 4/5 playoff spot.
So if we don't live up to that promise, then I wouuld say it's fair to examine the head coach. And Mike Babcock is a western Canada guy with a genuine attachment to Montreal by way of McGill. He coached Price and Subban at the Olympics, he knows the Leafs are always a mess with prima donnas like Kessel and Phaneuf, no reliable goalie... almost makes me hope that we tank this year and can move on from MThead.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Nov 10, 2014 14:07:25 GMT -5
You have to let it play out, but for now Therrien deserves the benefit of the doubt. As BC said, his won-loss record since he got here is actually pretty good. I would say there have been some disturbing underlying trends, mainly our declining even-strength production and poor possession metrics, but the W's are all that really count. I will say this is the most talented the Habs have been under the MB/MT regime and expectations are justifiably high. IMO, anything less than 100 points and a top 4 seed in the East will be a disappointment. Berg likes to publicly downplay expectations and say stuff like "our main goal is to make the playoffs" but that's just to cover his downside. I would still put us a step below Pittsburgh and Boston in the East, but we are right at the next level of "very good" teams and should be locks for a top 4/5 playoff spot. So if we don't live up to that promise, then I wouuld say it's fair to examine the head coach. And Mike Babcock is a western Canada guy with a genuine attachment to Montreal by way of McGill. He coached Price and Subban at the Olympics, he knows the Leafs are always a mess with prima donnas like Kessel and Phaneuf, no reliable goalie... almost makes me hope that we tank this year and can move on from MThead. I don't know about the media but I am willing to give the fan base the benefit of the doubt and say that if MTL could land Babcock they would be behind it. The guy's track record is outstanding. Bergevin could sell it on that alone.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Nov 10, 2014 14:27:28 GMT -5
When I first saw that article/blog when it came out, I was fully convinced that Leigh Anne was writing about a proposed change in head coaches in Hamilton. Lo and behold, it was the big club.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 10, 2014 15:01:01 GMT -5
...but the coaching staff should heed the same message….even if it comes to convincing the bilingual head coach adherents that winning is the universal language. That's kind of the fatal flaw in the "fire Therrien" logic though, isn't it? They don't ask how, they ask how many, and frankly speaking Therrien has been racking up the "how manys" ever since he got here. He took a last place team to first in the division, and people complained it was only because of the lockout. So the next year he took that team to the Eastern Conference Finals. This year he has the team sitting 3rd overall in the conference, FIFTH overall in the league. You can say it's all Carey, or the bubble can't last, or this, or that, but this is a results driven league and Therrien has the results. The team is 85-46-14 since he took over. I can't be bothered to do the research, but I would have to think that is right up there with the best coaching records in the league over the last three seasons. I don't want to come across as a Therrien apologist, because I'm really not a huge fan of his. But by the same token I just want the team to win, and that seems to be happening a lot more often than not ever since Therrien was hired. At some point we're just going to have to give him the benefit of the doubt, if only begrudgingly. One can't argue with the team's record and I wasn't heading that way anyways (because it's a weak argument). What the article is stating is that Therrien is not a bad coach, but it's not placing him at the same level as Quenneville, Trotz, Tippett or Babcock, guys who seem to get the most out of what they're given and/or win championships. (I omitted Sutter because I still think lights out goaltending is the reason for the Kings two championships, with lots of evidence showing that when Quick isn't at his best, the Kings lose). The question remains, if you have a chance at getting one of those 4 guys, do you do it, regardless of the loss of a reasonable coach? I hesitate to commend Therrien because I think he needs work on development of youngsters (even though he thinks he's pretty good at it) and on his line-up choices. He has strength in motivation, though, and he's improved a lot in his bench management. And let's throw in, on the challenging side, a Power Play that can't seem to get it together. He's responsible, not an assistant. He controls who the assistant is, and he can set the parameters. He's the guy throwing out the players, not his assistant. Maybe it's just a phase and the PP will get better, but it would be nice to see some adjustments made more quickly than they have been. So I admit he has his pros and some cons and given the language issue may be our best choice right now. Hartley might dispute that . Regardless, I equate him to a 60 point first line centre. If you can get an 80 point first line centre with no cost to your team other than money and no cap implications, wouldn't you do it? Why should coaching be any different? It's a compelling argument with the main stumbling block IMO, being loyalty to the guy you've hired, who hasn't done anything you'd normally fire a coach for. Would Berg actually have the courage to replace Therrien, because that's what it would take. I don't think you'd get a backlash from the French media. Babcock brings his own cachet. That kind of move would be shocking IMO and I don't expect it to ever take place. If it did, I think Cranky would bow down before the almighty Berg, because that would be ruthless management. I'd have trouble doing it myself and would probably be hoping my coach would give me a good excuse.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Nov 11, 2014 10:10:11 GMT -5
The wins and losses will even out, but our record reflects the system of OT and SO wins than solid underlying play.
ROW: 6 (9th in the conference) GD: -5 (10th in the conference) GF/G: 2.20 (14th in the conference) 5v5 Corsi: 50.8% (11th in the conference)
These are key success metrics and we are putrid in all of them. 4 wins came in the SO, which is basically a 50/50 scenario. The win against Minnesota was a disaster for the advanced stats crowd. I think we had a Corsi of 40% for the game (70 shot attempts for MIN, 45 for MTL). This is not a recipe for success and it tells me that we are basically back where we were before the Vanek acquisition - a lousy even strength team that doesn't control the play and relies far too much on Carey Price. It's only a 15-game sample, not nearly enough to draw firm conclusions, but this is where Therrien needs to show that he can learn on the job. He has plenty of good pieces to work with, but it's his job to get the most out of them and put players in positions to play to their strengths.
Maybe sending down Bourque and getting Sekac in full time will with Eller will drive more of a possession line, but this team needs to play A LOT better. And I'm not even talking about the PP, which I ASSUME they can figure out to achieve average production. We are back to the same refrain from last year - even strength production.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 11, 2014 10:45:12 GMT -5
Thanks BH. That analysis puts into words exactly what I've been seeing in the games. And it's difficult to get hopes up once the rubber really hits the road.
I think a lot of problems begin in our own end. We're back to not being able to clear the zone efficiently. I just don't see a ton of confidence/skill back there once you get past Markov and Subban (who also aren't off to terrific starts). While you need stay-at-home solid dmen, I'm not sure we have them in Weaver and Gilbert. Beau and Tinner are still learning (which is normal given their relative inexperience). Emelin? He's at his best when he's laying on the hits…but in terms of efficiency, I can't quite read him.
Then you look at our discipline. After 15 games, we've taken the 2nd highest amount of penalties (61)….but have the 2nd fewest PPOs (39). If our PK wasn't situated at 8th overall, we likely wouldn't be sitting at 21 pts. And how much of that stat has been goaltending?
I'm sure MB and his staff are aware of all the stats, numbers, percentages, scores…and I realize it's not easy in the salary cap era to instantly improve your team.
The one area that is easier to improve quickly (depending upon availability) is coaching. If your coaches are not putting together solid systems, icing the best possible lineups, and/or strategically managing the bench throughout the game…that's also a deficiency which can be masked by great goaltending.
On the brighter side of things….
Sekac has been a breath of fresh air…and if that line continues to be dangerous, they'll see the top checkers from the other team….opening the door a bit for the likes of Galchenyuk, Pleks, Pacioretty, DD.
Bourque being sent down sends a clear message to everybody.
|
|