A Real Barn Burner
Registered User
- Apr 25, 2016
- 2,590
- 3,178
Confirmed with Link: Bannister Out, Monty In
- Thread starter Linkens Mastery
- Start date
Hrkac Circus
Registered User
He’s already showing a better feel for young player development. Gave Hofer the start and immediately let Bolduc out of the dog house.
shpongle falls
Ass Möde
When they get Broberg and Leddy back they could get hot and go on a run.
mk80
Registered User
- Jul 30, 2012
- 8,241
- 8,860
BlueMed
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2019
- 2,948
- 3,537
Monty isn't just an X's and O's coach. He has a strong sense of connecting with players and getting the most out of their abilities. I'm not sure Bannister really had a knack for that.
Yeah, I have no desire to dump on Bannister. I think he wasn't terrible, and probably would have grown into a serviceable option. But Montgomery is probably a Top 5 in the league guy. It was a ruthless move by Armstrong in some ways, but it made the team better now and in the future.
Oberyn
Prince of Dorne
- Mar 27, 2011
- 14,431
- 4,012
I was no fan of Bannister but I did understand his approach at the end of the day. He wasn't the long-term guy here and he knew that. He basically had 2 years to build up his resume before the Blues likely kick him down the road and get the guy they really wanted (Montgomery). So I get why he coached the way he did and limited ice time to youngsters. He's trying to win as many games as possible so he doesn't hit the job market with a terrible losing record. That didn't align with what the Blues are trying to achieve and therefore didn't reflect well on us as fans. It's a tough situation as the Blues were hoping Montgomery would get fired after the playoffs but the Bruins held on to him. Keeping Bannister for a couple more years probably didn't break the bank as much as getting someone external so Army just retained him while keeping tabs on the Monty situation.
ChicagoBlues
Terraformers
- Oct 24, 2006
- 15,984
- 6,775
Disagree.
I didn't get why he coached the he way coached, at all.
Like someone else posted, Bannister could have hung his hat on player development. Instead, he failed to build his resume by not focusing on player development, failed again by playing old guys too much in a bad scheme and then failed yet again by not adjusting to the younger players with fresh legs.
Bannister did not build his resume. He created potential roadblocks by having to explain his poor logic during future interviews.
Oberyn
Prince of Dorne
- Mar 27, 2011
- 14,431
- 4,012
I never said what he did was correct or that I agreed with his approach. I am looking at it from his perspective to understand why he coached the way he did.
ChicagoBlues
Terraformers
- Oct 24, 2006
- 15,984
- 6,775
TheDizee
Trade Jordan Kyrou ASAP | ALWAYS RIGHT
- Apr 5, 2014
- 20,489
- 13,092
People feel sorry for Bannister? Why? He should have never been resigned after last year anyways.
He was a terrible coach and a part of the reason the start of this season was the most boring uninspiring display of Blues hockey since 2006.
I don't feel sorry for him one bit. He gets a nice fat contract for 2 years to do NOTHING. He is living the dream.
He was a terrible coach and a part of the reason the start of this season was the most boring uninspiring display of Blues hockey since 2006.
I don't feel sorry for him one bit. He gets a nice fat contract for 2 years to do NOTHING. He is living the dream.
Reality Czech
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 5,900
- 9,573
You don't think Army and the Blues front office don't share the same goal of winning as much as possible now? It's only a segment of the fan base that would rather lose now in the hopes of getting a higher draft pick that may or may pan out in a few years. Pretty sure the Blues and Bannister were trying to achieve the same thing.
I really don't get the big deal about Bolduc's usage this year. It's fairly normal for a young guy who's not producing to have limited ice time and to sit out a few games here and there. The fact that so many people are so fixated on it is a bit weird to me. I don't think many NHL teams just gift ice time to young guys right away unless they are in a total rebuild like Chicago and San Jose right now.
Majorityof1
Registered User
Interesting in the above video that Friedman said Montgomery turned down a multi year extention with the Bruins in the summer. This is wild speculation, but could both Montgomery and Armstrong have both been waiting for his Bruins deal to end, so he could coach the Blues?
It puts a lot of pieces in place. Why the Bruins fired him so quickly, how he got hired so quickly, comments they both made about not wanting to discuss the timeline of discussions. Just speculating.
It puts a lot of pieces in place. Why the Bruins fired him so quickly, how he got hired so quickly, comments they both made about not wanting to discuss the timeline of discussions. Just speculating.
TheOrganist
Don't Call Him Alex
- Feb 21, 2006
- 4,304
- 1,896
This is pretty much common knowledge...those of us pining for Montgomery knew it wasn't a wing & a prayer situation but that is quite plausible.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
We openly watched last year's Bruins Leafs series knowing if the Leafs won we were probably going to get Montgomery in the summer. The Bannister contract was always awkward in that context
I do wonder how much of the disconnect between Monty and Boston had to deal with him not being able to pick his own assistants, and whether or not an extension would have given him that option.
