|
Post by Yeti on Dec 15, 2002 1:14:04 GMT -5
I guess it is not a surprise that RDS is never critical of Therrien... But finally La Presse is showing a bit of autonomy and objectivity. It's coming from Mathias Brunet. I respect this guy, I trust him not to use false info. www.cyberpresse.ca/reseau/chroniqueurs/mbrunet/mbru_102120168477.htmlBasically, he's saying Therrien is not respected by the players, and he's giving examples. Some veteran players are at war with Therrien, and Brunet mentioned that those veterans are not marginal players (not Audette and Chow). A player said the club is always better prepared when Savard is travelling with the team. Savard is the only one having an impact on the players. In Denver, players decided they will deal with faulty players themselves, not wait for the coach to do it. Habs are winning now despite Therrien (that's from me, Brunet didn't go that far), the players are playing for themselves. Then Brunet has a paragrah or two about Therrien' qualities... but after reading 3/4 of the article, it doesn't sound very convincing. 9 embarassing games out 29, indeed something is wrong in the dressing room.
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Dec 15, 2002 8:23:38 GMT -5
Here is the english translation of the first part of the article... First mini-media bomb on Therrien in 2 years...
Will Therrien and his players be able to live together until the end of the season?
On the ground of information collected in recent weeks, this is a legitimate question.
Since the beginning of the season, some cues indicate a lack of harmony between the coach and the players.
When a team plays with so little passion on some nights, we have to ask ouselves if the coach still possesses enough authority to stimulate his players. The habs last year had the reputation of battling hard every night. This year, the team had to endure nine blown-out game in 29 games. It is not normal.
When the DG needs to go down in the dressing room to wake-up the players, and that they brilliantly win a game that same night against a team that trashed them the night before, you have to wonder…
Donald Audette et Mariusz Czerkawski complained about the lack of communication with the coach at the beginning of the season, but since they are not playing often, we thought it was just some pressure coming from two players seeking more ice time.
But other more impportant cues came up to the surface recently. When a well respected veteran player tries to make his point that the club is always better prepared when Savard is travelling with the team, we have to wonder… When another well-respected veteran vehemently declined to meet his coach in his office after the former ask a staff member to deliver the message (and that the player sent back the staff member with a message for Therrien- to **** off), you have to wonder… We are not talking here about two marginal players.
Last week in Denver, the players held an important meeting before the game against the avs. The day after, after two good games and 3 points out of 4, some players mentioned that the players decided to take charge of the club, that if a player made a mistake, someone on the bench would take care of that, not the coach. Should we conclude that the players are not working for themselves, not for the coach. When a player anonymously made negative comments about Therrien avec that cruel loss against the Hurricanes last year, was he only representing himself? Can Therrien last behind the habs’ bench if he not rallying all players?
|
|
|
Post by Ged on Dec 15, 2002 10:22:30 GMT -5
Nice to see you back Yeti.
Many years ago when Houle introduced Tremblay as the head coach, a horrific chill ran down my spine that threatened to paralyze me, and stop my heart all in one fell swoop. That chill was a premonition of things to come and proved to be correct. Now, you know what I'm going to say right? Yup, I had the exact same near death experience the first day I laid eyes on Therrien. I managed to survive that one as well, but a slow fuse was once again started. I instantly knew the hockey pain and suffering that I would have to endure as long as this guy was at the helm.
Therrien is overmatched at the NHL level. That has always been grotesquely clear to me. The fact that he has no control over the players has been obvious since day 1 IMO. The fact that the team exceeded all expectations last year, while riding a super hot goalie, was a God-send for Therrien, and probably the worst thing that could happen organizationally. As has been pointed out in many developmental threads, because he has to win now to keep his job, the rookies do not get integrated properly into the line up. This is just as much Savard's fault as Therrien's. This hurts the organization in the long run. There is absolutely no reason why young players should not be consistently given at least stints at this level to develop them properly. As has been pointed out, no rookie was even going to get a sniff, and that is not the way to develop players.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The rubber finally met the road when Therrien beaked off to the ref in the Canes series, and his players flat out quit on him. It would have been best to axe him during the summer and start fresh with a real coach, but that would take balls on behalf of the G.M. now wouldn't it? It's still just a matter of time for M.T., the clock is ticking, but for the benefit of the organization he should have been shown his papers long ago. In fact, he should have never even been allowed to step behind the bench.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 15, 2002 11:19:12 GMT -5
well, I wouldn't say the media is bashing MT...but they are finally noticing what we have noticed...the team doesn't want to play for him...but in that article they aren't bashing his competence... BTW, 9 blowouts? Buffalo Philly Philly Blues(3-2 game with 50 minutes gone in the game) New Jersey Carolina Dallas what were the other games?
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 15, 2002 20:08:39 GMT -5
To me it's been paradoxical. How is a team, with such poor leadership, above .500? And they have indeed, played better since the Colorado game. Even in that one, with better tending, it would have been a win. Brunet's article provides a possible answer...the players are doing it despite the coach. So if Brunet is aware of the problem, and finally decided to write about it, it's clear that Savard knows it too. But Savard hasn't done anything. I'll give him the benefit that he has the courage to fire Therrien, so consider then what might be the hold-up? A replacement? The right replacement? Does AS have someone he wants who isn't available or ready yet?
How long can he wait? If we incur a long losing streak, he'll probably have to act. If we look to make the playoffs, he can hold off longer. A deeper question is - If we're playoff bound, can we keep MT as the coach for the playoffs? Will the players keep digging deeper when MT's stupidity makes the price so much dearer?
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Dec 15, 2002 20:52:05 GMT -5
I like Brunet. Maybe he tell anecdotes selectively to asemble evidence for his case, maybe he pretend his angles on the club are original and incisive (they are always analised and debated first and more thoroughly at Habsrus) but I rate him one of better guys covering Habs.
As for Therrien, I felt he was hired as a natural "fall guy" in the dark days of November 2000. Opting to clean house on the fly when the quality of players in organisation was dismal and the future uncertain certainly limited the quality coaching alternatives. The club 'improved' (that is not saying much considering they were close to last overall) after MT took over. So he return for 2001-02, José stands on head for season, role players do their jobs and Habs return to playoff. And continues no defining impasse that requires Michel to play role he was cast in -- the fall guy.
The strange thing about this is MT's relationship with veterans. On one hand, he defers to them and rarely goes for development route unless the situation is completely untenable and he cannot save face utilising an inferior veteran. But, like Brunet says, veterans at times are crumbling about the preparedness of the club. Contradictions or no? I would say no -- because guys like Juneau, Gilmour, Koivu and Rivet have good enough hockey minds to see when "emperor have no clothes," (i.e. neither strategic brilliance nor the type of in the trenches kind of credibility someone like Carbo had with the troops).
If you accept premise Therrien was hired in a dark moment and still lacks the respect of his men, will the "fall guy" day come in 2002-03, or this summer, or sometime further in future?
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 15, 2002 21:34:56 GMT -5
To me there is nothing paradoxixixaxiacal. (big freaken’ word)
The vets can not maintain full steam all year round so they fall flat flat on their face, ergo blowouts. Do not forget that the condensed this season by two weeks. This does not help 35 year old legs. I suppose this is were 25 year old legs could really help.
No one has to listen to the couch’potatoe to play better. They are doing it for themselves.
What are they doing different from before? Better system? Nope, they work harder and try to stop the other team up high, in the center zone. There is no brilliant coaching change and I for one have no intention on jumping on the Therrien wagon. In fact, I would do everything I can to push it off a cliff.
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Dec 16, 2002 1:29:37 GMT -5
Sometimes a team can play well because of the adversity. What ever it takes to get the players to believe in one another and stick up for each other even if it's a coach they all have no respect for. It would be unusual if the players can turn their dislike for MT into a positive as these days the players usually take their money and wait for the gm to make his move. It is ironic that when they play well MT is heralded as the greaty motivator.
I think the real damage this is causing is the lack of development for the youth. The kids on the farm should be getting spot duty on the 4th line for 2 week rotations and if performing give them some more ice. They will all have to go through some form of adjustment when their turn comes so why not do it now instead of wasting our time on a few minutes each game on Aud, Lindsay etc.
Brunet may still be in the minority as just last night on the telecast the commentators were commenting on what a stroke of genious it was for MT to find Saku and Zed a big winger like Kilger. With that sort of media insight it's no wonder MT still has a job.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 16, 2002 1:31:38 GMT -5
To me there is nothing paradoxixixaxiacal. (big freaken’ word) That's nothing. I've been waiting, patiently, to spring "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" on you, and the second someone compares MT to a certain governess who flies through the air using an umbrella, it's coming out baby. What?, you don't find it unusual that a dysfunctional (sorry, that word slipped out by mistake), errr, a team that's really out of sorts, fighting with it's parent, ummm I mean coach, and backed by goaltending that's been more volatile than this years' stock markets, is still thick in the middle of a playoff race, or at least a playoff amble. They should be arm wrestling with Atlanta for the right to draft Tim, I mean, Nathan Horton. Instead, despite MT's striking similarity to a drooling St. Bernard, is playing above .500. Doesn't compute.
|
|