Discussion: Rod Brindamour

[SvechneJerk]

Great post.

To me it comes down to do I think another coach could do much better with this roster, and I think I'd have to say yes but not by much. With the talent level on this team I think we all expected to hang around the bubble and that's what has happened so far.

I can't help but look at what Barry Trotz has done with the Islanders & see that more could have been done. Are they markedly better talent-wise, top to bottom?

 

[Blueline Bomber]

I can't help but look at what Barry Trotz has done with the Islanders & see that more could have been done. Are they markedly better talent-wise, top to bottom?

That only matters if

A: You believe we had a shot at Trotz to be coach.

B: You believe it's fair to compare a first-year coach like RBA to a very experienced coach in Trotz

 

[SvechneJerk]

That only matters if

A: You believe we had a shot at Trotz to be coach.

B: You believe it's fair to compare a first-year coach like RBA to a very experienced coach in Trotz

I was simply responding to this - "do I think another coach could do much better with this roster". I think the answer to that is "YES".

Now, the answer to "Will we ever pay for a NAME head coach?" is most assuredly "NO". I'm not delusional.

 

[AD Skinner]

I almost used trotz as a reference in that post but didn't for those very reasons. I think Trotz may well go down as one of the most successful coaches ever so it's not really a fair comparison even if money were no object. Like, yeah goalie A is alright but what if we had Dominik Hasek? Maybe that's giving trotz too much credit but brind'amour has this team right about where I think most other coaches would, with a long injury to a key player (that may have ended up actually helping the team) and no clear starting goalie

 

[Blueline Bomber]

ESPN had an article with some quotes from Rod about the team, and some from Williams about Rod.

The imperfect joys of the Carolina Hurricanes

First-year coach Rod Brind'Amour said it's a "tough one" when asked about his team's offense.

"I got frustrated with it," he said. "People said we just shot the puck from wherever. What they should have done is dug in more and looked at the grade-A chances. Because that's what we track. We don't track shots on goal. We track chances for and chances against. We were way higher earlier in the year, us vs. them. Now it's leveled off and we're scoring more."

But the number of impact players offensively remains limited.

"When you look at our group overall, I don't think we're the most talented group. I think everyone would agree on that," Brind'Amour said. "We have a couple of really nice players, and then we have 'the rest.' And maybe 'the rest' need a few more shots to put the puck in the net. That's how we knew we were going to be built. I don't think we anticipated the first 25 games would be that low. But now our last six or seven games, all of a sudden it's leveling out. And you're like, 'This is what should have happened early in the year.'"

"I'm very familiar with Rod, and he's very familiar with me. We haven't been together as player and coach for a long time, but we've known each other for a long time," said Williams, 37. "As a captain, you have to convey the messages that the coach is sending, and convey them throughout the team. You have to make sure everyone is on board with it, because if someone is off board, then the train isn't running smoothly."

Where this train is headed is anyone's guess, but Williams feels the momentum has turned in the Hurricanes' favor.

"I feel earlier in the season that we were getting really bad puck luck," he said. "I'm one of those old-school guys that feels that you make your own puck luck, but there is something to be said about having bad puck luck. But now we're getting a little bit more of what we deserved earlier in the season.

 

[Roboturner913]

I think he is (or at least will be) a good coach. I've tried to stay out of the convos where everybody and their mother comes out to rip him and talk about how out of his depth he is. It's his first time as head coach and it's a long season. I'd rather see what he does in a long-term sense and I'm way more interested in what he does in terms of creating a winning atmosphere/attitude than whatever on-the-ice tactical decisions, bad line combos, bad challenges, etc. make him look out of his element in a short-term way.

 

[cptjeff]

Dundon clearly pulled from his business background on this one. Sometimes for management positions, you don't hire skills, you hire people. Rod is clearly the best man for the job, even if not the most skilled coach. And honestly I think it's a fine hire. He's clearly a leader and a teacher, which is something that a team this young likely needs more than a system coach that will shoehorn you into a role.


I often scoff back at people that scoff at the notion that having real "leadership" types in the room is important. "These guys are professionals, they're being paid millions of dollars, why should they need motivation?" Well, for one, you get paid to do your job and you certainly don't give it your all at work every day. Second, take your situation at work where if you continue to work hard enough you'll get a raise, get promoted, etc., then compare that to a guy like TT who now knows that he can score anything from 45 to 100 points the next 5 years and get the same amount in return (not picking on TT, he just happened to extend most recently).

There was something rotten about this team that we could all sniff for the last 10 years. Something had gone wrong with the culture of this team. We needed to change that, and I can't think of a single better guy to do it than Rod Brind'Amour. And frankly, he has. It feels like a different team to us fans. Based on the players' responses to the media, it feels different to them in the room too.


I don't undervalue X's and O's and actual coaching, and I do think Rod is lacking in that. He's not the perfect option - who is when they get hired for their first coaching job? But I think the front office correctly identified that the greater need was a culture change, and Rod was the right guy to lead it. And, frankly, I think you never count out Rod Brind'Amour, and a guy with his work ethic will learn the X's and O's of coaching a lot faster than a guy like Bill Peters will learn to get guys to run through a brick wall for him like RBA does.

I think Rod is an expert motivator with potential to be average-above average at X's and O's given a few years. But even more than that, I think he's a leader, and when you put leaders in leadership roles the rest typically works itself out.

Yeah, this was about my view when he was hired. When things were looking bad in November-December, I went down the path of being frustrated with his mistakes and wanting him gone. But the team has pulled through, and isn't just winning by getting bounces while playing the same old perimeter crap, they're playing significantly better hockey. Rod's learning curve as a coach is right in front of us on full display. He's made mistakes, some of them not terribly small. But he's really gotten his legs under him, and has made adjustments, and it shows in the team on the ice in a very real way. I really believe that we've actually and finally turned a corner this season. Rod has learned how to adapt and survive tactically, and he's always been one of the best leaders and motivators around. There's really something to be said for a coach who you don't want to disappoint rather than a coach who just gets angry at you. When that's a guy who can also figure out how to make the lines tick and get the team taking higher quality shots, that's a combination that tends to keep a coach in the league for a long time and have a lot of success. Ultimately, it's not just that we're winning, it's that it finally seems sustainable.

Also, I really hope he has Roy Willams and Coach K on speed dial.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I was lukewarm at best about the hiring of Rod, but big picture, I think he's done a good job overall, considering the hand he was dealt. Yeah, some of his moves are head scratchers, but read any team's board and you'll hear the same thing, even about guys like Babcock. We don't always know what goes on behind the scenes (ie..we were wondering about Hamilton's usage only to later hear he was nursing an injury for the first couple months) or what short term moves he is making to achieve a long term result. Consider this:

Canes traded away their best goal scorer - Skinner
Canes traded away a top 6 forward who could play a position of need - Lindholm
Ferland has been battling injury.
Staal has missed almost half the season with injury.
Rask was injured, then stunk.
Necas wasn't NHL ready.
The team has been running with some combination of Aho + Wallmark/Bishop/McKegg/Martinook down the middle. That's the worst combination of centers in the NHL.
McGinn has been disappointing.
Svechnikov hasn't been much of a factor to date.
The goalie tandem at the start of the season now has Darling in the AHL and Mrazek with .894 SV%. The team's best goalie is a waiver wire pickup.
Hamilton was battling injury for the first couple of months and until recently, he and Faulk had less than 10 goals between them.

This is a team devoid of talent and the fact that he has them still in the hunt, and with a better record at this point in the season than they were last year, is a miracle. Unlike prior years, they aren't folding like a cheap suit any time something goes just a little bit wrong. There are very few games where they haven't been competitive.

To say Trotz could do more, I'm not sure I agree. Look at the Islanders roster. They are significantly more talented upfront than the Canes. They have 7 forwards that have scored at least 20+ goals or 50+ points in the not to distant past (that doesn't include Ladd). Canes have 4 including Ferland who hit 20 last year (5 if you go back 4 seasons when Staal just hit 20 goals). Their bottom 6 is filled with legit NHL players (Komorov, Filpula, Cizikas, Clutterbuck, Martin, Kuhnhackl, Ladd) where-as the Canes are using a bunch of AHL/NHL tweeners. They also have 2 goalies that are playing fantastic.

Their D, on paper, isn't great and that's where Trotz does get credit for his system and getting the team's buy-in. His system works though, because they have enough legit talent up front so they can still be 17th in the NHL in goals for while being the best in GA by playing a smothering type system. I'm not sure the Canes have the horses to pull that off. Adding another 20+ goal scorer in El Nino is definitely a step in the right direction.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Cliff notes of long post above: This team is devoid of talent and Rod's done an admirable job IMO. Not sure any other coach could get any more out of this group.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

Cliff notes of long post above: This team is devoid of talent and Rod's done an admirable job IMO. Not sure any other coach could get any more out of this group.

No kidding. Our second best center for most of the season has been Lucas Wallmark and our best goalie has been waiver claim McBackup, yet somehow we’re only four points out at the all star break. I really hope Necas can take the next step next season. Or Waddell can pick up a good center. Or both, ideally.

 

[MinJaBen]

Not sure any other coach could get any more out of this group.

 

[AD Skinner]

Glad to hear from you BBA, and I agree. If someone had told me before the season started the team would be hanging around the bubble at this point in the year with Staal missing as much time as he has I probably wouldn't have believed it. but here we are

 

[The Faulker 27]

Cliff notes of long post above: This team is devoid of talent and Rod's done an admirable job IMO. Not sure any other coach could get any more out of this group.

He has emerged.

 

[Ole Gil]

I think the chances this group is generating is a testament to how good an X and O guy rod is. People get distracted by the weightlifting, but he seems to put that level of effort into everything. That includes video and strategy, I think.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Stick your head in the sand if you so choose.
There's plenty of evidence though. Just look at our past coaches.

Lavi - as soon as the talent dried up and our goaltending was bad, he became a mediocre coach. Goes to two other teams and leads them to the SCF.
Maurice - panned as a terrible, conservative coach. Finally goes to a team with talent and his team had the 2nd best record in the NHL last year and 4th best this year.
Peters - Never got the Canes past 87 points in 4 seasons. Goes to a team with talent and they are the best team in the west with 71 points by the all-star break.

This team is running a converted winger and 3 AHLrs as our centers, have two goalies off the trash heap and are at the bottom of the league in terms of salary.

Can't see any coach getting more from this group.

 

[emptyNedder]

I was not in favor of hiring RBA as head coach. My biggest concerns were that he had been part of the Canes product for most of the down years and he was directly responsible for a poor power play. My choice was Vellucci. That said, I think Brind'Amour is doing a good job. The most important thing he has done is give this team an identity--they play high-energy, forechecking, chance-creating hockey.

Given that identity, I would challenge the consensus that the team is woefully talent deprived. I like to look at players whose production (not playing style, since it is points that win games) is analogous to other players. This team has young versions of Tavares, Wheeler, JVR in Aho, Teravainen, and Svechnikov. Niederretter might just be analagous to Skinner/Lindholm in that he was a hight pick who had stagnated but will produce better on a new team. I wouldn't call any team with John Tavares, Blake Wheeler, JVR, and Jeff Skinner devoid of talent.

How about the others. I don't think it is unreasonable to compare Warren Foegele's first half season to Blake Coleman's first 23 games in which he scored 2 points. This season, his second full season, Coleman is on pace for 28 goals. Martinook doesn't need an analogy. He is a solid player who is above-average on the penalty kill and good for 10g/25p every season. That is what Leo Komarov (who was mentioned above) is producing this year. Many argue that Wallmark is basically an AHLer or 4th line center at best. But you could describe him as a European-developed player, "always a hard worker and team player" who was drafted outside the first two rounds. Except that quote is from EliteProspects about Tomas Plekanec. Plekanec scored at .42 ppg as a 23-year-old. Wallmark is at .34 ppg and improving.

I know not all the analogies will continue to hold, some of the Canes will stagnate. When I suggest that players like Foegele and Wallmark have more potential, many scoff. But go back and look at how many of us doubted that Aho could be a 1C. I suggested that he had produced eerily similar numbers his first two years to Tavares. Many scoffed-- that would mean Aho would score 81 points, while learning a new position. Judging players by analogy is not always useful. But it does lead me to believe that the Canes are not as hapless as some.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Given that identity, I would challenge the consensus that the team is woefully talent deprived. I like to look at players whose production (not playing style, since it is points that win games) is analogous to other players. This team has young versions of Tavares, Wheeler, JVR in Aho, Teravainen, and Svechnikov. Niederretter might just be analagous to Skinner/Lindholm in that he was a hight pick who had stagnated but will produce better on a new team. I wouldn't call any team with John Tavares, Blake Wheeler, JVR, and Jeff Skinner devoid of talent.

How about the others. I don't think it is unreasonable to compare Warren Foegele's first half season to Blake Coleman's first 23 games in which he scored 2 points. This season, his second full season, Coleman is on pace for 28 goals. Martinook doesn't need an analogy. He is a solid player who is above-average on the penalty kill and good for 10g/25p every season. That is what Leo Komarov (who was mentioned above) is producing this year. Many argue that Wallmark is basically an AHLer or 4th line center at best. But you could describe him as a European-developed player, "always a hard worker and team player" who was drafted outside the first two rounds. Except that quote is from EliteProspects about Tomas Plekanec. Plekanec scored at .42 ppg as a 23-year-old. Wallmark is at .34 ppg and improving.

I know not all the analogies will continue to hold, some of the Canes will stagnate.

I get what you are saying, but I wasn't referring to what these players may become 2 or 3 years down the road when I say the team is devoid of talent. I'm talking right now. When Svechnikov becomes a 30G, 55-60P player like JVR has been, when/if Teravainen becomes a 80+ point player like Wheeler is, when Foegele scores 25+ goals, when Neiderreiter hits 30+ goals like Skinner, when Wallmark achieves what Plekanec has, etc.... then we can use those comparisons.

But as it stands today, none of those guys, except maybe Aho (and that's debatable), are really close to the guys you are comparing them to. That's why I think Rod is doing a fairly decent job, because he is getting results with a number of guys that aren't overly talented (today), with the weakest group of centers in the NHL, and a couple of goalies off the trash heap.

 

[emptyNedder]

But as it stands today, none of those guys, except maybe Aho (and that's debatable), are really close to the guys you are comparing them to.

My point was that every player has to start--and most (Plekanec, Coleman) don't start as solid NHL point producers. So as I mentioned, RBA has done a good job.
With the addition of Niederreiter, the Canes are pretty much an average NHL team. Sure they don't have Tampa's or San Jose's star power. But most of those arguing about "weakness" are confusing talent for rookie/early career scoring struggles. I remember watching the Toronto game and thinking that Wallmark was battling Tavares to a standstill in the defensive zone. Few AHLers or even 4th line NHLers will do that.
As someone mentioned in another post, the Canes are averaging 3.5+ goals the past 13 games. They have had a few lucky bounces, but it shouldn't be surprising that young NHL-level talent took nearly half the season to start producing points. Most of the good players in the league started their careers without getting on the score sheet often.
Again, the Canes are not near the top of the league talent wise, but they are not at the bottom. Credit to RBA for combining motivation and patience. It has been paying off.

 

[NotOpie]

Cliff notes of long post above: This team is devoid of talent and Rod's done an admirable job IMO. Not sure any other coach could get any more out of this group.

But as it stands today, none of those guys, except maybe Aho (and that's debatable), are really close to the guys you are comparing them to. That's why I think Rod is doing a fairly decent job, because he is getting results with a number of guys that aren't overly talented (today), with the weakest group of centers in the NHL, and a couple of goalies off the trash heap.

Hey @Boom Boom Apathy great to have you back! Hope all is well with you and yours. Missed our debates, our agreements, and your knowledge.

That said, I mostly agree with you. I do agree with @hitchhiker42 and his assessment of Wallmark. I believe he has the potential to follow much the same path that he did in the AHL. I'm not sure I'm as optimistic and see him putting up 50 points. But I do see him as a potential 35-40 point guy. He has proved to be defensively responsible and even seems a bit faster (although that might just be his hockey sense which seems to manifest itself in good positioning).

Anyway, welcome back!

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Thanks NotOpie. I won't be posting too much, but will check in from time to time, particularly threads like this.

I'm not at all disagreeing with you or hitchhiker that some of the guys we have could develop into much better and more impactful players down the road and they have to start somewhere. I fully expect some of them to do just that, heck, maybe even by the end of the season. That's irrelevant though to the statement that this team is lacking talent right now, because that's what the discussion is about. How Rod has gotten a team that is pretty below average talent wise to a decent record. Heck, since 2008, only 1 other Canes team has had a better record (point % wise) on Jan 26th. Of course, that's not a very high bar.

I don't think we've been even average in talent, although Nino moves the needle quite a bit. My view: Defense - Above average; Goaltending -Below average, Centers - Well below average, particularly with Jordan out, Wingers - Below average

There's really nothing that supports that these guys are "average" in terms of NHL talent other than defense.

I do agree also with hitchhiker about giving credit to RBA for combining motivation and patience.

 

[NotOpie]

Yeah, I totally agree about the talent level....it has actually taken me a while to take off my "rose colored glasses" of optimism to be able to admit that these last couple of years. My Wallmark comment was more of an aside, but I've always liked his game (but he's no Chris Terry).

And I also agree with the comments about Rod, leadership, and the job he's done without really emphasizing strategy or even tactics...winning through "try hard" with this roster is indeed something to give him credit for.