Choose the next HC

[Sojourn]

Carlyle's success in Anaheim is nearing a decade ago. I'm not willing to give those first two years in Anaheim more weight than everything since, and since then he hasn't actually shone as a coach.

That's before you consider that his first year in Anaheim was a transition year for the league, and Niedermayer had a Hart-worthy season. People can forget how silly good Niedermayer was that season, and how much he carried that team on many nights. The following season he benefited from having a team in front of him that is, arguably, the best team since the 2004-2005 lockout. Yeah, he gets some credit for using it the way he did, but that roster was ridiculous. Carlyle, to me, gets more credit for getting out of the way of how good that team was, than he does for being some mastermind behind it. When he needed to actually coach more, and didn't have that complete strength of roster, he struggled.

I'd actually love to see a guy like Sutter come in. He's probably at the top of my list(at least, looking at guys who are potentially available). Not to "fix" Getzlaf or Perry, but to come in and bring some structure, in and out of the locker room. To give us someone who can actually out coach the opposing team coach, when the situation demands it. I don't think it would be very exciting hockey, and I'd prefer a better alternative, but realistically, he's probably one of the better options.

 

[Paul4587]

I don't dislike him at all. I just think that his system is outdated, that his success is overstated because people ignore that he had little to none of it without very high end players, that the current star players quit on him, and that his last playoff appearance anywhere was presiding over blowing a 4-1 lead in the last 14 minutes of the third period of a game 7.

Retreads don't work.

In fairness to Carlyle that team had no business being in the playoffs, let alone taking the Bruins to game 7. The rosters he had to work with in Toronto were terrible.

Agreed that retreads don't work. He's not the guy this team should be looking at.

 

[Vipers31]

RC year 1 we beat a higher seeded Flames team in 7 games sweep the Avalanche before losing to a Oilers team with a great run that made it to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals and might of won if their #1G wasn't hurt in the Stanley Cup finals.

That was better then anything we had done with BB as coach.

How so? Losing to a team that lost to one of the worse cup winners of the last decade is better than losing two of the better cup winners? Just because we had a game 7 win in there after a worse regular season?

 

[Lord Flashheart]

Wait, you mean he isn't going to come in like into a high school locker room, have the guys do some bag skates, yell at some people and our 30+ aged multimillionaires will put their heads together and say "you know, coach is right, if we actually work really hard together, we can do this thing, come on guys"...? All these sports movies have been a lie?

Shush, don't tell anyone.

 

[Sojourn]

RC year 1 we beat a higher seeded Flames team in 7 games sweep the Avalanche before losing to a Oilers team with a great run that made it to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals and might of won if their #1G wasn't hurt in the Stanley Cup finals.

That was better then anything we had done with BB as coach.

I'm not sure I agree. I don't think any of the teams we beat were anything special, and if Edmonton had won they would likely have been perceived as the weakest Cup-winner post-lockout.

I think there's a reason that they entered the 2006-2007 season as one of the clear favorites, and it wasn't just because they added Pronger.

 

[Sojourn]

How so? Losing to a team that lost to one of the worse cup winners of the last decade is better than losing two of the better cup winners? Just because we had a game 7 win in there after a worse regular season?

Well ****.

Beaten to it. I'm rusty.

 

[darkwingduck]

Ugh, went on a sports site, Saw kings sign new head coach (not named sutter). Stupid Sacramento Kings.

 

[Ducks in a row]

How so? Losing to a team that lost to one of the worse cup winners of the last decade is better than losing two of the better cup winners? Just because we had a game 7 win in there?

We beat lower seeded Stars,Jets,Flames teams that hadn't been in playoffs for a while with BB as coach totally unimpressed. Choking a 3-2 series lead each time we had lost with BB as coach just terrible.

Beating the Flames in 2006 was much better then any playoff series win we had with BB as coach. Beating the Avalanche would also say was better. Sure the Hurricanes probably are the weakest Cup winner in cap era but still they had been a good team. Losing to the Oilers team that was better then their regular season record and had Pronger leading the way and almost winning the Cup is no shame.

I'm not sure I agree. I don't think any of the teams we beat were anything special, and if Edmonton had won they would likely have been perceived as the weakest Cup-winner post-lockout.

I think there's a reason that they entered the 2006-2007 season as one of the clear favorites, and it wasn't just because they added Pronger.

Adding Pronger was huge reason why we had been Cup favorites in 2006-07

 

[Vipers31]

We beat lower seeded Stars,Jets,Flames teams that hadn't been in playoffs for a while with BB as coach totally unimpressed. Choking a 3-2 series lead each time with BB as coach just terrible.

Beating the Flames in 2006 was much better then any playoff series win we had with BB as coach. Beating the Avalanche would also say was better. Sure the Hurricanes probably are the weakest Cup winner in cap era but still they had been a good team. Losing to the Oilers team that was better then their regular season record and had Pronger leading the way and almost winning the Cup is no shame.

So in many words - losing to Keith/Doughty and their stronger cup winners is a shame and just terrible, while losing to Pronger on his way to losing to a lesser cup winner is no shame.

I'm not content with what we've seen under Boudreau and am very in favour of moving on, but that seems very one-sided. Despite the division banners being mocked, winning those is much more impressive than winning two playoff series some year.

 

[Sojourn]

Adding Pronger was huge reason why we had been Cup favorites in 2006-07

I didn't say it wasn't. I said it wasn't the only reason.

The Ducks had already impressed people in those playoffs, and were perceived as a good team that could potentially contend for a Cup. Of course adding a Norris quality defenseman, and the player who almost certainly would have won the Conn Smythe, had Edmonton won, is a huge add. But the Ducks were perceived as a good team, period. Adding Pronger just made them that much better.

 

[Ducks in a row]

So in many words - losing to Keith/Doughty and their stronger cup winners is a shame and just terrible, while losing to Pronger on his way to losing to a lesser cup winner is no shame.

I'm not content with what we've seen under Boudreau and am very in favour of moving on, but that seems very one-sided. Despite the division banners being mocked, winning those is much more impressive than winning two playoff series some year.

Blowing 3-2 series leads so much is a shame.

Sure it is great to win so many division titles but it is about the playoffs and would rather have a playoff run like in 2006 playoffs then what we had with BB as coach totally unimpressed with the series we won with him and embarrassed by so many 3-2 chokes.

I didn't say it wasn't. I said it wasn't the only reason.

The Ducks had already impressed people in those playoffs, and were perceived as a good team that could potentially contend for a Cup. Of course adding a Norris quality defenseman, and the player who almost certainly would have won the Conn Smythe, had Edmonton won, is a huge add. But the Ducks were perceived as a good team, period. Adding Pronger just made them that much better.

Sure they had been impressed with that run but without Pronger no way we would of been a favorite to win the cup. Don't think we would of been called a contender either. Maybe a darkhorse.

 

[Sojourn]

Sure they had been impressed with that run but without Pronger no way we would of been a favorite to win the cup. Don't think we would of been called a contender either. Maybe a darkhorse.

I think you're missing the point here, but I absolutely think we would have been called a contender. Take Pronger away from that team, and it's still a very good team. Yes, you'd have to fill the spot vacated by him, but that roster was stacked. A roster isn't stacked simply because of one player.

 

[Ducks in a row]

I think you're missing the point here, but I absolutely think we would have been called a contender. Take Pronger away from that team, and it's still a very good team. Yes, you'd have to fill the spot vacated by him, but that roster was stacked. A roster isn't stacked simply because of one player.

Without Pronger we wouldn't of been a great team we would of been a middle of the pack western conference team. Pronger had such a huge impact for us. Take him away from our blueline and we would not of been nearly as good a team we would of been a darkhorse team nothing more and totally believe we would of been called just that a darkhorse team.

 

[Ducks DVM]

I think you're missing the point here, but I absolutely think we would have been called a contender. Take Pronger away from that team, and it's still a very good team. Yes, you'd have to fill the spot vacated by him, but that roster was stacked. A roster isn't stacked simply because of one player.

Without Pronger that team was still a contender. With Pronger that team was a favorite.

 

[Sojourn]

Without Pronger we wouldn't of been a great team we would of been a middle of the pack western conference team. Pronger had such a huge impact for us. Take him away from our blueline and we would not of been nearly as good a team we would of been a darkhorse team nothing more and totally believe we would of been called just that a darkhorse team.

You're suggesting that a team that had just gone to the Conference Finals was a middle of the pack Western Conference team. I'm not sure you thought that through.

You seem to be making a very lopsided argument regarding that Anaheim team, both in regards to the coaching, and the team itself.

 

[Sojourn]

Without Pronger that team was still a contender. With Pronger that team was a favorite.

Bingo. I'm not trying to suggest they were a favorite without Pronger. Having the capability to throw two Norris-finalists onto the ice for 30 minutes a game is significant. But it's not like Pronger made that team. He just made it better. We still had two good offensive lines. We had the best shutdown line in the league(and still would have without Pronger). We had J.S. Giguere. We had Niedermayer, and a very good #3 in Beauchemin. They were already a very good team.

I think you'd need to show that they would have been worse in 2006-2007 than they were in 2005-2006 to suggest that isn't the case.

I don't think he's giving nearly enough credit to that team.

 

[Ducks in a row]

You're suggesting that a team that had just gone to the Conference Finals was a middle of the pack Western Conference team. I'm not sure you thought that through.

You seem to be making a very lopsided argument regarding that Anaheim team, both in regards to the coaching, and the team itself.

With Pronger we had 110 points tied for 2nd most and we had been 3 points ahead of Sharks and Stars in our division. Without Pronger I am sure we would of finished 3rd in our division.

Pronger was a huge impact on our team. Just getting him on the team had a huge impact on everyone from coaches to players believing they would win not to mention the great on ice impact of having another elite workhorse defenseman actually playing.

Darkhorse is what I totally believe we would of been called without Pronger because of our 2006 playoffs not a favorite or contender either.

 

[70sSanO]

Maybe Bob should coach the team. He could even save the team money by wearing two hats. Plus, he would no longer have anyone else to blame. Sounds like the prefect replacement for Bruce.

Great idea! He might be able to save even more by putting a time clock on the bench and have the players punch in for every shift. Dock the players if they are late for a shift or not ready for work resulting in poor quality. We can take the definition of a budget team to a new high... I mean low.

John

 

[Sojourn]

With Pronger we had 110 points tied for 2nd most and we had been 3 points ahead of Sharks and Stars in our division. Without Pronger I am sure we would of finished 3rd in our division.

Pronger was a huge impact on our team. Just getting him on the team had a huge impact on everyone from coaches to players believing they would win not to mention the great on ice impact of having a elite workhorse defenseman actually playing.

Where have I suggested Pronger didn't have a significant impact?

What I'm scoffing at is your suggestion that the Ducks absolutely wouldn't have been viewed as a Contender without him. Where's the evidence of that? They were a good team, and arguably an up and coming team at that, just the previous season.

As for where the team would finish without Pronger... you can't just take Pronger away. That Anaheim team very likely wins the President's Trophy if not for the massive injury problems they went through. Injury problems that included Pronger, mind you. He only played 66 games that season.

As for what the team believed... I don't buy that for a second. You really think a team that had just gone to the Western Conference Finals. That had Scott Niedermayer captaining it. That had Teemu Selanne, and Conn Smythe winning J.S. Giguere, didn't think they could win? You're overstating Pronger's addition, which is actually surprising to me, because that's tough to do. He was a very big addition to the team, but somehow you've managed to convince yourself that the Ducks were middle of the pack without him? Again, where is the evidence of that?

 

[Ducks in a row]

Where have I suggested Pronger didn't have a significant impact?

What I'm scoffing at is your suggestion that the Ducks absolutely wouldn't have been viewed as a Contender without him. Where's the evidence of that? They were a good team, and arguably an up and coming team at that, just the previous season.

As for where the team would finish without Pronger... you can't just take Pronger away. That Anaheim team very likely wins the President's Trophy if not for the massive injury problems they went through. Injury problems that included Pronger, mind you. He only played 66 games that season.

As for what the team believed... I don't buy that for a second. You really think a team that had just gone to the Western Conference Finals. That had Scott Niedermayer captaining it. That had Teemu Selanne, and Conn Smythe winning J.S. Giguere, didn't think they could win? You're overstating Pronger's addition, which is actually surprising to me, because that's tough to do. He was a very big addition to the team, but somehow you've managed to convince yourself that the Ducks were middle of the pack without him? Again, where is the evidence of that?

Your not valuing the impact of him on the Ducks as high as you should.

No Pronger and the view everyone had for the team would of been totally different for everyone. I don't see them being viewed as a contender without him just because of a good playoff run in 2006. I totally believe we would of been viewed as a darkhorse.

6th seed in 2005-06. Finished 3 points ahead of Sharks and Stars for division in 2006-2007. Take Pronger out for those 66 regular season games he did play and I have no doubt we would not of won the division. No division and we would of been the lower half seeding.

OK fine the team would of still believed they could win because that is how it is in sports but it wouldn't of been as strong of a belief.

 

[Terry Yake]

there's no doubt acquiring pronger is what set the 06-07 ducks over the top and instantly made them THE cup favorite

while that 05-06 team made a very surprising, deep playoff run, without pronger the "experts" would have probably predicted the 06-07 ducks would finish in the 5-8 position and that is where i'd also predict that team would have most likely finished. i remember the day the ducks acquired pronger the hockey world quickly chose the ducks as their pick to win it all in 2007.

 

[Sojourn]

Your not valuing the impact of him on the Ducks as high as you should.

No Pronger and the view everyone had for the team would of been totally different for everyone. I don't see them being viewed as a contender without him just because of a good playoff run in 2006. I totally believe we would of been viewed as a darkhorse.

6th seed in 2005-06. Finished 3 points ahead of Sharks and Stars for division in 2006-2007. Take Pronger out for those 66 regular season games he did play and I have no doubt we would not of won the division. No division and we would of been the lower half seeding.

OK fine the team would of still believed they could win because that is how it is in sports but it wouldn't of been as strong of a belief.

So, the team that went to the Western Conference Finals, was an up and comer, and should only have been expected to improve... was a middle of the pack team. Okay.

I don't see any evidence at all to support that, and you haven't provided any except to say that they finished 3 points ahead of San Jose and Dallas(not middle of the pack teams, by the way) even though they had massive injury problems. They also finished three points behind Buffalo and Detroit. Yet, they stomped their way through the playoffs, only slowing down slightly against another favorite in Detroit. Are we really going to say that the team point totals are so meaningful? To a team that was so dominant out of the gate(even when I'd argue they weren't even playing great hockey at times) that they not only dealt with major injury problems, but had enough of lead that they were able to be on cruise control into the finish, and were well rested heading into the playoffs? I think that, just maybe, you're giving too much weight to the standing points.

I really don't think I am understating Pronger's impact. But he's one player, who joined an already very good team. Hockey is a team sport. This isn't the NBA. Take away the Pronger trade, and then make the reasonable assumption that Burke tries to improve the team in other ways, and you've got yourself a contender. Not a favorite, but a contender.

Yes, if you remove Pronger from that team entirely, and assume it's the same team with him missing, and you might have a problem. That isn't what would have happened. That team in 2005-2006 in the first half was not the same as the one in the second half(26 of their 43 wins came in the New Year). A full season of that team likely finishes higher than 6th seed. That's before you even consider potential off-season improvements. So, I go back to my previous statement that you haven't provided any proof they would be perceived as anything but a contender.

That Anaheim team was better than you give them credit for. If you're going to call them middle of the pack, I'd say they were quite a bit better than you give them credit for. Which goes back to the initial point that Carlyle really didn't have a lot of success without a great roster.

 

[Zegras Zebra]

To get back on track, I think the 2006-07 Ducks were a team of destiny where all the pieces were together to make a run for that year, with no real impact on future seasons. Carlyle basically was given the keys to a Ferrari and told not to crash. I do not think it is fair to judge Carlyle on that season.

However, it is not fair to judge him on his last half season with the Leafs either as it was a horrible roster. It should be pointed out that those Leafs were close to a playoff spot before Carlyle was fired, and then internally combusted in the remainder of the season afterwards.

I do feel Carlyle is a decent coach, and may be a decent fit for another NHL team, but he is not the answer to Anaheim's playoff disappointments.

 

[Sojourn]

To get back on track, I think the 2006-07 Ducks were a team of destiny where all the pieces were together to make a run for that year, with no real impact on future seasons. Carlyle basically was given the keys to a Ferrari and told not to crash. I do not think it is fair to judge Carlyle on that season.

However, it is not fair to judge him on his last half season with the Leafs either as it was a horrible roster. It should be pointed out that those Leafs were close to a playoff spot before Carlyle was fired, and then internally combusted in the remainder of the season afterwards.

I do feel Carlyle is a decent coach, and may be a decent fit for another NHL team, but he is not the answer to Anaheim's playoff disappointments.

I'm pretty sure he actually had a winning record at the time he was fired that season. Might be wrong on that. I don't think he was the biggest problem in Toronto. This goes back to how much a coach can really do, and, really, what a coach can do comes down to what he's given to work with. Carlyle might have had tremendous resources off the ice, but on the ice he didn't have a very good roster. Still, if he wasn't the biggest problem, I'm not sure he was a positive either. That was a team with issues, and it certainly felt like he was floundering along with the rest of the team.

If this team were in a different situation, I mean, maybe Carlyle would make more sense. But I don't see Carlyle as the kind of coach that helps this team get over the hump, especially since he hasn't shown any real ability to do that in the past. When things go well, I think Carlyle does well, but when the team struggles, I've always felt Carlyle looks a little uncertain as to what to do. And by looks, I mean, he looks like it on the bench, with his nervous ticks and pacing. He looks unsure. Then he tinkers with things, and it kind of comes across as just throwing **** against the wall and seeing if it sticks.

For a team that, with some expect changes in the off-season, will likely still be expected to contend... well, he just isn't the guy I'd want. He's someone I'd look to more as a go-between at this point, to keep the spot warm until one of the better coaches becomes available. I'd prefer not to have a "bench warmer" coach at a time the team is looking to go all the way.

 

[Ducks in a row]

So, the team that went to the Western Conference Finals, was an up and comer, and should only have been expected to improve... was a middle of the pack team. Okay.

I don't see any evidence at all to support that, and you haven't provided any except to say that they finished 3 points ahead of San Jose and Dallas(not middle of the pack teams, by the way) even though they had massive injury problems. They also finished three points behind Buffalo and Detroit. Yet, they stomped their way through the playoffs, only slowing down slightly against another favorite in Detroit. Are we really going to say that the team point totals are so meaningful? To a team that was so dominant out of the gate(even when I'd argue they weren't even playing great hockey at times) that they not only dealt with major injury problems, but had enough of lead that they were able to be on cruise control into the finish, and were well rested heading into the playoffs? I think that, just maybe, you're giving too much weight to the standing points.

I really don't think I am understating Pronger's impact. But he's one player, who joined an already very good team. Hockey is a team sport. This isn't the NBA. Take away the Pronger trade, and then make the reasonable assumption that Burke tries to improve the team in other ways, and you've got yourself a contender. Not a favorite, but a contender.

Yes, if you remove Pronger from that team entirely, and assume it's the same team with him missing, and you might have a problem. That isn't what would have happened. That team in 2005-2006 in the first half was not the same as the one in the second half(26 of their 43 wins came in the New Year). A full season of that team likely finishes higher than 6th seed. That's before you even consider potential off-season improvements. So, I go back to my previous statement that you haven't provided any proof they would be perceived as anything but a contender.

That Anaheim team was better than you give them credit for. If you're going to call them middle of the pack, I'd say they were quite a bit better than you give them credit for. Which goes back to the initial point that Carlyle really didn't have a lot of success without a great roster.

Up and coming team isn't the same as a favorite or even a contender and a up and coming team might not improve a lot to actually be a cup contender instead of a darkhorse.

Your evidence is just how well they did in the playoffs and expecting them to improve a lot without having traded for Pronger and going beyond a darkhorse to a contender. You think without the Pronger trade we would of been as good? If we had a few points less we would of been a middle of the pack team and it's easy or at least should be easy to see us being that way without Pronger.

Yes we stomped our way into reaching the western conference finals but Pronger was a very big part of that. The saying goes defense wins championships and he was a very big reason why we had such a great defense. Take him away and we only have 2 defenseman that had been workhorses in the playoffs and our 2nd defense pair would of been much worse. Our blueline was so good because of having 3 workhorse defenseman with 2 being elite.

We came charging out of the gate in 2006-2007 because we had Pronger who was a great defenseman and our team had a great belief in themselves to win and acquiring Pronger had boosted that.

One NHL player can have a big impact on a team maybe not quite like a NBA player but still big. Pronger was a big impact more then what you seem to be giving credit for. If we didn't acquire Pronger and made other moves we most likely wouldn't of been as good a team the Pronger trade was just so big of a move.

The Ducks team that won the Cup I consider the best cap era team. Without Pronger we most likely finish with a worse regular season record and don't win the Cup. If you think we would of still won the pacific division and won the Cup without Pronger then that is your opinion which I totally disagree with.