Management Does Joe Sacco deserve to be officially the HC of the Bruins in 2025-2026?
- Thread starter Fenway
- Start date
Bruin4
Registered User
This is what im thinking. I think Sweeney did a great job this deadline in acquiring assets, but He's not the guy I want deciding in what direction to move forward in with those assets he acquired. He's been terrible at free-agency and in 10 years he's hasn't made any impactful enough of a hockey trade to right the ship. His drafting dating back to 2015 hasn't been great, but he has come away with McAvoy, Swayman and lohrei but dam thats in 10 years.
I know its not going to happen, so Ill just keep my fingers crossed that Sweeney makes better decisions with the recently acquired assets and the Bruins are right back in the playoff hunt next year. There's no doubt he has a plan and he always has, but its just executing it.
This has become clearly a Sweeney team,as its only Pasta left over from the prior regime, Im thinking Ownership has faith in him moving forward, i hope their right and that they remember the players he started with, compared with who he has today, Bergeron, Marchand, krug, Krecji, Chara, Hamilton, Tuukka, Looch and Pasta are little easier to bld around than what he's facing today.
Last edited:
PlayMakers
Registered User
No. Time to clean house on the whole coaching staff. Time for some new ideas and a fresh approach.
- Jan 29, 2003
- 27,119
- 24,944
Was he put in an unfair situation?…..Absolutely!
Is he smart and hard working?…… Absolutely!
Do I think he should stick around next season?…..Not a chance in the world!
I think his ceiling as a coach is a “B”.
I don’t find him to be inspiring at all, and want someone from the “outside” for next season.
Like they did with the roster, it’s time for change.
Is he smart and hard working?…… Absolutely!
Do I think he should stick around next season?…..Not a chance in the world!
I think his ceiling as a coach is a “B”.
I don’t find him to be inspiring at all, and want someone from the “outside” for next season.
Like they did with the roster, it’s time for change.
Deal Law
Cynic with a bar license
Over the volcano
Registered User
Only way I see it is if the team has one hell of a finish to the year and even then it'd make him just one possible candidate for the spot
Thirty Seven
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2017
- 1,969
- 3,773
No. The whole coaching staff needs to go, every aspect of their game is frustrating to watch and the coaching staff seems to refuse trying anything different.
Over the volcano
Registered User
No. I will acknowledge the situation he was put in wasn't exactly great, but nothing i have seen from him indicates he would be the right move going forward.
Guy is the embodiment of the ._. emoji. No emotion shown at any time ever.
All i know is no retreads.
I do not want Mike Sullivan. I do not want Quenneville. I do not want whatever guy gets let off the wheel of jobs like a Laviolette or one of the other guys.
If it's a guy like Jay Woodcroft? maybe, since there's still some surface to scratch there. But none of these guys that have been around 20+ where you know exactly what you're getting.
Guy is the embodiment of the ._. emoji. No emotion shown at any time ever.
All i know is no retreads.
I do not want Mike Sullivan. I do not want Quenneville. I do not want whatever guy gets let off the wheel of jobs like a Laviolette or one of the other guys.
If it's a guy like Jay Woodcroft? maybe, since there's still some surface to scratch there. But none of these guys that have been around 20+ where you know exactly what you're getting.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2003
- 27,119
- 24,944
But, all of those guys have won cups, right?
(Maybe not Laviolette?)
Sometimes they get another job because they are good.
Not sold on any of them, BTW….but also not sold on giving a guy a chance just because he hasn’t had a chance yet.
BigGoalBrad
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2012
- 11,261
- 3,991
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 26,274
- 26,944
In my opinion there was little Sacco could do about the offense. The roster just didn't have the weapons. And there was an uptick in scoring under him vs. Monty, where the offensive output was historically bad. They caught a bit of lightning in a bottle with the Geekie-Zacha-Pasta line. If I have one major gripe with their decisions to generate more offense was Elias Lindholm's use on the PP. Him in the bumper just doesn't work, I don't believe it's resulted in a single PP goal. They also leaned into McAvoy too much on the PP, his comment about McAvoy going back on the PP for zone entries. I think it's clear that Mason Lohrei should be given the keys to the PP umbrella.
My main reason for not wanting him back was the defensive play. When I look at a head coach, I wonder can they:
1) Design an effective defensive system that works for the personnel he's given
2) Communicate that defensive system effectively so the players understand what they coaches want them to do.
3) Get buy-in from the players to play the desired system.
Fact is, Sacco and Co. failed to improve the defensive play of this team. Sure, they tweaked it from what Monty had them doing to start the year, went to a more conservative approach, they had to.
But quality offensive teams still picked the Bruins apart far too often even after the coaching change. Lop-sided losses in games the Bruins had no chance in. Lots of late game collapses and lots of goals scored right after the Bruins had scored. To me, his one true task as head coach, get this group playing better defensively, he wasn't successful at. And while didn't have the weapons up front, he had a group that could have been better defensively than what it was. I don't buy they notion he got tossed into some tough situation. A former head coach being asked to coach a group of players he's largely familiar with and has relationships built having coached several players, including the leadership group, for a significant period of time.
I'd like to see them take a look at Todd Nelson. Back-to-back Calder championships with Hershey in 2023 and 2024. Has them on top of their division and 2nd overall in the AHL this year. Felt he got a raw deal when he took over Edmonton back in 2015. I don't want to see any retreads like Sullivan, Quenville, or Laviolette.
My main reason for not wanting him back was the defensive play. When I look at a head coach, I wonder can they:
1) Design an effective defensive system that works for the personnel he's given
2) Communicate that defensive system effectively so the players understand what they coaches want them to do.
3) Get buy-in from the players to play the desired system.
Fact is, Sacco and Co. failed to improve the defensive play of this team. Sure, they tweaked it from what Monty had them doing to start the year, went to a more conservative approach, they had to.
But quality offensive teams still picked the Bruins apart far too often even after the coaching change. Lop-sided losses in games the Bruins had no chance in. Lots of late game collapses and lots of goals scored right after the Bruins had scored. To me, his one true task as head coach, get this group playing better defensively, he wasn't successful at. And while didn't have the weapons up front, he had a group that could have been better defensively than what it was. I don't buy they notion he got tossed into some tough situation. A former head coach being asked to coach a group of players he's largely familiar with and has relationships built having coached several players, including the leadership group, for a significant period of time.
I'd like to see them take a look at Todd Nelson. Back-to-back Calder championships with Hershey in 2023 and 2024. Has them on top of their division and 2nd overall in the AHL this year. Felt he got a raw deal when he took over Edmonton back in 2015. I don't want to see any retreads like Sullivan, Quenville, or Laviolette.
Smitty93
Registered User
- Dec 6, 2012
- 8,591
- 9,845
I think it's important to look at this statistically, since this is a results business.
I feel like it's worth comparing to the Bruce Cassidy interim situation. In 2017, under Claude, they had the 20th best PT% in the league (0.527), 22nd in GF/GP, and 13th in GA/GP, with a -6 goal differential over 55 games. Under Cassidy, they had 6th best PT% in the league during his 27 games coached (0.685), 1st in GF/GP, 4th in GA/GP, and +29 goal differential. That's a clear case of massive improvement. In terms of an 82-game pace, we're talking about a 26 point improvement.
Let's compare that to Monty versus Sacco this year. With Monty they were 20th in PT% (0.475), 31st in GF/GP, 28th in GA/GP, with a -21 goal differential over 20 games. With Sacco, they've only been 23rd in PT%, but improved to 0.522, 21st in GF/GP, 18th in GA/GP, with a -6 goal differential over 45 games. That would be an improvement of 8 points on an 82-game pace. Yes, there have been injuries and promotions/demotions, but it's largely been the same group, besides H. Lindholm.
Throwing some other numbers out there, at all strengths, under Monty, they were 31st in GF% (41.03) vs. 9th in xGF% (52.33), while under Sacco, they've been 19th in GF% (48.85) vs. 19th in xGF% (49.84). We can argue whether that's a situation of luck, or whether you'd prefer the higher xGF% situation or having a smaller difference in GF% vs. xGF%.
Yes, there's been improvement, but it's not like that improvement has been anything to get excited over. I don't think we can say Sacco has coached them to perform above their talent level and that's what you look for in a coach. I also have a tough time saying "let's give him a training camp", when we're talking about a guy who's been here since Claude. This was a trade deadline of organizational change, keeping a guy like Sacco at the helm, who's been here 10+ years, would just be a sign of business as usual.
I feel like it's worth comparing to the Bruce Cassidy interim situation. In 2017, under Claude, they had the 20th best PT% in the league (0.527), 22nd in GF/GP, and 13th in GA/GP, with a -6 goal differential over 55 games. Under Cassidy, they had 6th best PT% in the league during his 27 games coached (0.685), 1st in GF/GP, 4th in GA/GP, and +29 goal differential. That's a clear case of massive improvement. In terms of an 82-game pace, we're talking about a 26 point improvement.
Let's compare that to Monty versus Sacco this year. With Monty they were 20th in PT% (0.475), 31st in GF/GP, 28th in GA/GP, with a -21 goal differential over 20 games. With Sacco, they've only been 23rd in PT%, but improved to 0.522, 21st in GF/GP, 18th in GA/GP, with a -6 goal differential over 45 games. That would be an improvement of 8 points on an 82-game pace. Yes, there have been injuries and promotions/demotions, but it's largely been the same group, besides H. Lindholm.
Throwing some other numbers out there, at all strengths, under Monty, they were 31st in GF% (41.03) vs. 9th in xGF% (52.33), while under Sacco, they've been 19th in GF% (48.85) vs. 19th in xGF% (49.84). We can argue whether that's a situation of luck, or whether you'd prefer the higher xGF% situation or having a smaller difference in GF% vs. xGF%.
Yes, there's been improvement, but it's not like that improvement has been anything to get excited over. I don't think we can say Sacco has coached them to perform above their talent level and that's what you look for in a coach. I also have a tough time saying "let's give him a training camp", when we're talking about a guy who's been here since Claude. This was a trade deadline of organizational change, keeping a guy like Sacco at the helm, who's been here 10+ years, would just be a sign of business as usual.
GloryDaze4877
Barely Irrelevant
GloryDaze4877
Barely Irrelevant
I’m sure Sacco is a good guy.
This organization needs to change their approach to drafting, developing players and how they incorporate those players into their system.
I don’t see him being the guy to handle the 3rd part well.
This organization needs to change their approach to drafting, developing players and how they incorporate those players into their system.
I don’t see him being the guy to handle the 3rd part well.
Smitty93
Registered User
- Dec 6, 2012
- 8,591
- 9,845
Sweeny is absolutely right that Sacco inherited a mess. I don't blame him for this season at all.
That said, I don't have any reason to believe that Sacco is the bet man available to coach the team next year
That said, I don't have any reason to believe that Sacco is the bet man available to coach the team next year
The Hockey Tonk Man
Registered User
easton117
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2017
- 5,227
- 6,175
I’d go the full front office down to the studs personally.
And not as a shot at anyone. They tried, had some success, now it’s time for a new vision going forward
I agree with this, I also don't see a Sullivan for next year. I see him as a guy you wish you had in 2019-23 when you were championship driven. I don't see him as the right fit for a rebuild
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: Game 64: New York Rangers vs Columbus Blue Jackets, 6pm ET, MSG
- Latest: RangersFan1994
-
