A Real Barn Burner
Registered User
- Apr 25, 2016
- 2,590
- 3,179
I am ready to run through a wall for this man
I am ready to run through a wall for this man
Disagree.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.
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.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.
I applaud you for attempting to understand his logic, but........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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
I feel like this is always a chicken-egg argument. Is the young player getting limited ice time because he’s struggling, or is he struggling because he’s getting limited ice time?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.
How did the chicken cross the road?I feel like this is always a chicken-egg argument. Is the young player getting limited ice time because he’s struggling, or is he struggling because he’s getting limited ice time?
We’re olde.I had forgotten Montgomery played on a line with Hull for a bit. The line nickname “Monty Hull” was floated by someone now I think about it.