Gretzky as the Coyotes' Coach 2005-2009

[Sadekuuro]

It seemed to me gretz was always beat red on the bench huffing and hawing yelling at everybody. I think that he had a hard time not being able to get o the ice and have more control, not bring able to change a game but having to watch helplessly from the bench.

That's my memory too, red-faced Gretzky constantly screaming at the referees and the players and everyone else (kinda like Sullivan in Pittsburgh every time I see him, sans the winning). Did he enjoy a single moment of it?

 

[Big Phil]

Thats the best thing I remember too, the reaction to the Ovechkin goal.

Legends like Gretzky don't really make good coaches. Imagine if for example Kobe Bryant became the coach of an NBA team, would he know how to use the bench players? Because Kobe knew very little about the bench. Same with Gretzky who didn't seem to know how to utilize 4th liners.

So many great players either didn't try coaching or did it for a very short and unsuccessful time. Maurice Richard, Ted Lindsay, Boom Boom, Mario, Yzerman, Messier, Orr, Hull, Beliveau.............none either coached in the NHL or coached very long or very well. It is just an entirely different dynamic when you are that skilled of a player and are trying to teach ones who are much less skilled and aware than you were.

 

[Noldo]

Didn’t Olli Jokinen state in some article that Gretzky’s abilities to see the game the way he did made it frustrating between him and the players? He would expect them to be in certain positions and see certain things that they their hockey IQs couldn’t quite get?

I mean it’s not common for top athletes in their respected sport to not make great coaches. It doesn’t always translate well.

Quote from Jokinen’s biography:


What was Gretzky like as a coach?
"I believe he would be a good coach for an experienced team. We had a pretty young team. I still learned a lot from him. Amazing hockey sense, which could have also been a weakness as a coach. He saw the game do differently than a normal player. When you came down the wing on a 3-on-3 attack and shot the puck. You came to the bench and '99' would ask 'What did you do?'. I said I got a good shot on net. He would say 'No, no! You turn around and pass to the third wave. Not the first defenseman that comes behind, but the second. There you throw the pass.' I thought to myself 'I can't see that shit.'

His practices were legendary. Wayne had always done training in a way, where he would always pass the puck. Every breakout in training came from Gretzky. D-to-D, then to Wayne and only then to the forwards. He built the practices in a way that he also got to play. Great guy. He bought every worker in the arena a Breitling watch. The hot dog stand guys, and couple of hundred people who were working there, all got a watch. That stuck with me. He took care of players and training stuff like he was still a player.

 

[Sanf]

Quote from Jokinen’s biography:


What was Gretzky like as a coach?
"I believe he would be a good coach for an experienced team. We had a pretty young team. I still learned a lot from him. Amazing hockey sense, which could have also been a weakness as a coach. He saw the game do differently than a normal player. When you came down the wing on a 3-on-3 attack and shot the puck. You came to the bench and '99' would ask 'What did you do?'. I said I got a good shot on net. He would say 'No, no! You turn around and pass to the third wave. Not the first defenseman that comes behind, but the second. There you throw the pass.' I thought to myself 'I can't see that ****.'

His practices were legendary. Wayne had always done training in a way, where he would always pass the puck. Every breakout in training came from Gretzky. D-to-D, then to Wayne and only then to the forwards. He built the practices in a way that he also got to play. Great guy. He bought every worker in the arena a Breitling watch. The hot dog stand guys, and couple of hundred people who were working there, all got a watch. That stuck with me. He took care of players and training stuff like he was still a player.

Was going to mention this, but you brought the perfect translation from it.

edit. though IIRC Jokinen mentioned that D´s probably didn´t like his method of training.

 

[Minar]

That's my memory too, red-faced Gretzky constantly screaming at the referees and the players and everyone else (kinda like Sullivan in Pittsburgh every time I see him, sans the winning). Did he enjoy a single moment of it?

I can't imagine he enjoyed it. I feel bad that he wasted 4 years of his life bring crazy mad.

 

[Minar]

Quote from Jokinen’s biography:


What was Gretzky like as a coach?
"I believe he would be a good coach for an experienced team. We had a pretty young team. I still learned a lot from him. Amazing hockey sense, which could have also been a weakness as a coach. He saw the game do differently than a normal player. When you came down the wing on a 3-on-3 attack and shot the puck. You came to the bench and '99' would ask 'What did you do?'. I said I got a good shot on net. He would say 'No, no! You turn around and pass to the third wave. Not the first defenseman that comes behind, but the second. There you throw the pass.' I thought to myself 'I can't see that ****.'

His practices were legendary. Wayne had always done training in a way, where he would always pass the puck. Every breakout in training came from Gretzky. D-to-D, then to Wayne and only then to the forwards. He built the practices in a way that he also got to play. Great guy. He bought every worker in the arena a Breitling watch. The hot dog stand guys, and couple of hundred people who were working there, all got a watch. That stuck with me. He took care of players and training stuff like he was still a player.

That's fascinating that he wanted his players to play like he did, doing things only he could do.

 

[Noldo]

That's fascinating that he wanted his players to play like he did, doing things only he could do.

I suspect that seeing the game at that level had become natural for Gretzky and he could not understand how others did not see such obvious choices.

 

[billybudd]

Why did he want to coach? And why did the Phoenix people want him (an ex-player with absolutely no experience as coach)?

Could be wrong, but I thought it came out in the Coyotes bankruptcy that Gretzky was getting an outrageous annual salary. Like $8 or $10 million a year when guys like Hitchcock were making in the neighborhood of $1 or $2 million. Seems like a pretty good reason to take a gig like that.

As to the second question, I think they thought his name could bring brand recognition to a franchise that needed it.

 

[VanIslander]

Imagine film review sessions:

"Why didn't you pass then? .... you could have passed here, there or there..."

You can teach defense. You can't teach grown men hockey sense.

 

[The Pale King]

Dave Tippett came in right after Gretz and had a disproportionate amount of success relying on his grinder types, his Boyd Gordons and Vern Fiddlers paired with a really aggressive forecheck. Tippett seemed to have a great relationship with those types of players. Even his "star" Shane Doan, was a lunch-pail kind of guy. What can Gretzky really tell you about the forecheck? And moreover, do you really believe him when he's preaching about getting to loose pucks in the corners?

Gretz had a lot of appreciation for those types of guys as teammates, but it's tough to picture him cultivating those important relationships with 3rd/4th liners. At least to me.

That said, I would have loved to see what Gretzky could have done behind the bench with a skilled team. Even a "bad" skilled team like Atlanta or even the Kings of those years, who definitely had more skill than those Yotes teams, would have been a better fit.

It's a weirdly fascinating chapter in NHL coaching history either way.

 

[Noldo]

That said, I would have loved to see what Gretzky could have done behind the bench with a skilled team. Even a "bad" skilled team like Atlanta or even the Kings of those years, who definitely had more skill than those Yotes teams, would have been a better fit.

It's a weird chapter in NHL coaching history either way.

Having Gretzky working with youngsters and cultivating their imagination and ability to see different options. With mature players who have already been indoctrinated the same would not work as well.

 

[The Pale King]

Having Gretzky working with youngsters and cultivating their imagination and ability to see different options. With mature players who have already been indoctrinated the same would not work as well.

Are you saying that did happen, or that was management's goal, or that you would have liked to see this?

As mentioned in this thread, it doesn't seem like Gretzky and Turris had a good relationship.

 

[The Panther]

I do think Gretzky would have been better off coaching a team with more high-end skill, and one less reliant on a 'grinding' kind of game.

It's an odd thing. We certainly never saw Howe, Orr, or Lemieux attempt coaching. I don't think any one of them would have even considered it. Beliveau, Lafleur, Messier, Bourque... not a one. Rocket Richard lasted two games.

 

[sr edler]

His assistant Ulf is still coaching though, isn't he?

 

[VanIslander]

Gretzky coaching 7-9 year olds.

Now that could be productive.

 

[Sentinel]

I suspect that seeing the game at that level had become natural for Gretzky and he could not understand how others did not see such obvious choices.

I came here to say exactly this. I would think a great player simply can't comprehend how a player can stand five feet away from the net and not score.

The only great players who made great coaches, off the top of my head, were Lemaire and Robinson. I guess they learned from the best.

 

[sr edler]

I said I got a good shot on net.

Olli.

 

[JackSlater]

I came here to say exactly this. I would think a great player simply can't comprehend how a player can stand five feet away from the net and not score.

The only great players who made great coaches, off the top of my head, were Lemaire and Robinson. I guess they learned from the best.

I don't know if Robinson qualifies as a great coach, but Toe Blake does. Maybe Hlinka too. Certainly great players making great coaches is a rarity, in other sports as well, but then again there aren't many great players to start with.

 

[vikash1987]

I remember that the Coyotes’ younger players at the time, such as Mikkel Bodker, Marty Hanzal and Peter Mueller, had nothing but positive things to say about Gretz as coach. They said he was very down-to-earth and cared for the players, and that he was a great teacher—and, when he spoke, guys listened.

But maybe he was too much of a players’ coach and a hockey mind, and not enough of a disciplinarian who could stir things up in the locker room a la Tortorella? Not sure if that was a part of the problem.

 

[Johnny Engine]

So many great players either didn't try coaching or did it for a very short and unsuccessful time. Maurice Richard, Ted Lindsay, Boom Boom, Mario, Yzerman, Messier, Orr, Hull, Beliveau.............none either coached in the NHL or coached very long or very well. It is just an entirely different dynamic when you are that skilled of a player and are trying to teach ones who are much less skilled and aware than you were.

I came here to say exactly this. I would think a great player simply can't comprehend how a player can stand five feet away from the net and not score.

The only great players who made great coaches, off the top of my head, were Lemaire and Robinson. I guess they learned from the best.

There's a problem here.

Of the players who can, by any tortured definition, be considered Gretzky's peers (like 10 or 15 guys) Richard, Roy, Shore, Harvey and Gretzky all did some coaching. No all time great coaches in that group, but Roy has his Adams trophy and Shore won a lot in the AHL.
For the guys in the range just below Shore in our (or anybody's) top-100, down to wherever you rank Jacques Lemaire-types, there are plenty of good coaches (Robinson, Boucher, etc.) and a few all time greats (Blake, Patrick), but out of those 150-200 guys, did a third of them become coaches? Without counting, I'd guess no. Think about how many players of Mike Sullivan's calibre have moved through the NHL in the past 100 years. How many of them became good coaches? How about guys who reached Mike Babcock's level? I'd expect most posters here have gone to high school with a half dozen guys who fall in that range. How many Babcocks are there in the thousands of guys like that?

I'd say coaching success in the NHL is positively correlated with on-ice success, just not to the point where you can reliably expect even a Gretzky to be an instant success.

 

[Theokritos]

There's a problem here.

Of the players who can, by any tortured definition, be considered Gretzky's peers (like 10 or 15 guys) Richard, Roy, Shore, Harvey and Gretzky all did some coaching. No all time great coaches in that group, but Roy has his Adams trophy and Shore won a lot in the AHL.
For the guys in the range just below Shore in our (or anybody's) top-100, down to wherever you rank Jacques Lemaire-types, there are plenty of good coaches (Robinson, Boucher, etc.) and a few all time greats (Blake, Patrick), but out of those 150-200 guys, did a third of them become coaches? Without counting, I'd guess no. Think about how many players of Mike Sullivan's calibre have moved through the NHL in the past 100 years. How many of them became good coaches? How about guys who reached Mike Babcock's level? I'd expect most posters here have gone to high school with a half dozen guys who fall in that range. How many Babcocks are there in the thousands of guys like that?

I'd say coaching success in the NHL is positively correlated with on-ice success, just not to the point where you can reliably expect even a Gretzky to be an instant success.

It's interesting that not more retired NHL stars give coaching a try. It's been said that other sports are also like this - well, perhaps in North America, but if you look at soccer, many top players actually do switch to coaching after their playing career. The list is pretty long.

 

[mrhockey193195]

There's a problem here.

Of the players who can, by any tortured definition, be considered Gretzky's peers (like 10 or 15 guys) Richard, Roy, Shore, Harvey and Gretzky all did some coaching. No all time great coaches in that group, but Roy has his Adams trophy and Shore won a lot in the AHL.
For the guys in the range just below Shore in our (or anybody's) top-100, down to wherever you rank Jacques Lemaire-types, there are plenty of good coaches (Robinson, Boucher, etc.) and a few all time greats (Blake, Patrick), but out of those 150-200 guys, did a third of them become coaches? Without counting, I'd guess no. Think about how many players of Mike Sullivan's calibre have moved through the NHL in the past 100 years. How many of them became good coaches? How about guys who reached Mike Babcock's level? I'd expect most posters here have gone to high school with a half dozen guys who fall in that range. How many Babcocks are there in the thousands of guys like that?

I'd say coaching success in the NHL is positively correlated with on-ice success, just not to the point where you can reliably expect even a Gretzky to be an instant success.

As a mathematician/engineer...

I will say, I think both elements are true. You are 100% correct that on-ice skill correlates with coaching, but I also think for the top players who turn into bad coaches, one of the most common problems they have is not being able to relate to the way lesser players see the ice.

 

[ChuckLefley]

Dave Tippett came in right after Gretz and had a disproportionate amount of success relying on his grinder types, his Boyd Gordons and Vern Fiddlers paired with a really aggressive forecheck. Tippett seemed to have a great relationship with those types of players. Even his "star" Shane Doan, was a lunch-pail kind of guy. What can Gretzky really tell you about the forecheck? And moreover, do you really believe him when he's preaching about getting to loose pucks in the corners?

Gretz had a lot of appreciation for those types of guys as teammates, but it's tough to picture him cultivating those important relationships with 3rd/4th liners. At least to me.

That said, I would have loved to see what Gretzky could have done behind the bench with a skilled team. Even a "bad" skilled team like Atlanta or even the Kings of those years, who definitely had more skill than those Yotes teams, would have been a better fit.

It's a weirdly fascinating chapter in NHL coaching history either way.

Of course you can take the converse of this and say that a former grinder could never be able to coach skilled players. That’s not the way it works.

 

[JackSlater]

TSN says that Hockey Canada has asked Gretzky to coach Canada at the Spengler Cup this year, and Gretzky is currently considering it. Someone has been reading this thread and become strangely inspired.

 

[Stanislasjc]

George Laraque was a bit Theoren Fleury-ish in his bids for attention post-career. I remember there being a minor kerfuffle over his book's claim that Gretzky was the worst coach he ever had.

I think partially the "worst coach ever thing" was scooped up by the media, but Laraque's actual critique detailed in his book was more measured and not attention-grabbing.

He felt Gretzky might have been too nice to be a good head coach, that the clubhouse had a "country club atmosphere", and that Gretzky seemed unfazed by losing (which struck Laraque as odd). Laraque said the lax vibes weren't good for his motivation, and he gained 35lbs playing in Phoenix.

Now he may be wrong, it's only the opinion of one guy in one book. But there is something to me that rings true about the country club atmosphere. If there is one criticism I would level at late-career Gretzky, it's that he tends to spend his life surrounded by "his" people, in nice comfoy surroundings, lapping up accolades and talking about the old days. Gretzky seems to have become almost sterilized by his own legend, content with his place as an elder statesman and symbol of hockey greatness.

To be clear, THIS is FINE. If I achieved even 1/100th of what he did in my life, I would probably be okay with the status quo. He deserves it. I got a slight raise at my retail job, and I have been performing like Jose Theodore after he cashed in on his Hart trophy season.

I'm just saying, Laraque's criticism of Gretzky strikes me as though it could easily be true.