Is your coach an idiot?

[The Gr8 Dane]

yes , there's like 4 smart ones

 

[Pablo El Perro]

Not sure if he's a genius, but I wouldn't call PoMo an idiot.

 

[TKB]

[mod] I literally said that we won't be able to do some aspects of the coach's job in the post you quoted. But can do others like not play players that get dominated in chances against. Every other league has embraced analytics.

So your position is that you could coach at least one NHL team better than the current coach, because you follow retail hockey analytics?

I am not going to get in the way of the fantasy, but sure do look forward to seeing how this thread plays out.

 

[Nikolajs Sillers]

He's not idiot, he just past his prime.

 

[cjm502]

yes

 

[JianYang]

It's a tough gig. Even jf you happen to have a coach that can get buy in from the players, the message typically gets stale sooner than later.

Next thing you know, it's time for a new voice.

 

[Esq]

Yes, but he's better than the last one

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

Nope, Carbs is a genius and really knows how to motivate and develop players. Maybe the best coach in the league right now?

 

[CanadienShark]

I'm not crazy about the coach for either of my teams. Love the GMs, but coach... Meh.

 

[These Are The Days]

No

St-Louis do take the odd decision here and there but he's a f***ing nuclear physicist/200 IQ when you compare him to either Michel Therrien or Dominic Ducharme

As a neutral observer and hockey fan, I couldn't possibly agree more. The Habs really need to stop digging themselves into terrible hires because. Well. You know. The last thing you wanna do is fire St. Louis just to hire Guy Boucher next.

I cannot stress enough how much you don't want that

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

The Sabres? Perpetually, yes.

 

[VivaLasVegas]

Knoblauch comes across as quite smart to me and often when he makes moves that I doubt, he ends up getting good results. For a rookie coach I knew nothing about at first I've been very impressed.

Like every Oilers coach of this era though, he's started pushing the McDavid Draisaitl button more and more often despite it having diminishing returns and it hurting the team in the long run.

Silver lining of the McDavid injury is that that option isn't there for awhile and they'll have to remember how to win without him. (Or they won't, in which case we're screwed regardless.)

I honestly do not believe that Knoblauch has any say in whether McDrai play together or not. Every Oilers coach has tried to keep them apart. Every Oilers coach had failed. It's not the coaches.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

So your position is that you could coach at least one NHL team better than the current coach, because you follow retail hockey analytics?

I am not going to get in the way of the fantasy, but sure do look forward to seeing how this thread plays out.

My position is that I can't coach any team. Taking me out of the equation because I'm not particularly good at hockey but I absolutely believe that some people who follow "retail hockey analytics" and don't have biases towards hockey mythology can make some roster decisions better than coaches. I know you're deriding basic analytics, but analytics doesn't have to be complicated. The more complicated the more of a chance that they're wrong if anything. I know that in data mining there are definitely concepts where models are too complicated and end up giving noisy results. All you really need to know is how many shot attempts players face while on the ice and what was their quality. It doesn't have to be complicated. And if you ARE going to deride retail hockey analytics, can you with a straight face tell me you think that any hockey coaches utilize proprietary complicated analytics? Or do they go off gut feel and who is a warrior on the ice?

 

[SladeWilson23]

Players aren't mindless drones. Coaching isn't just making the lineup card, and calling timeouts.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

My position is that I can't coach any team. Taking me out of the equation because I'm not particularly good at hockey but I absolutely believe that some people who follow "retail hockey analytics" and don't have biases towards hockey mythology can make some roster decisions better than coaches. I know you're deriding basic analytics, but analytics doesn't have to be complicated. The more complicated the more of a chance that they're wrong if anything. I know that in data mining there are definitely concepts where models are too complicated and end up giving noisy results. All you really need to know is how many shot attempts players face while on the ice and what was their quality. It doesn't have to be complicated. And if you ARE going to deride retail hockey analytics, can you with a straight face tell me you think that any hockey coaches utilize proprietary complicated analytics? Or do they go off gut feel and who is a warrior on the ice?

Like most bosses/managers good coaches tend to know their players strengths and try to help them perform to them. Does that require analytics, I imagine it does. But that's not everything.

 

[ThatGuy22]

Only when he doesn't set the lines like I want it.

Or when he pulls the goalie to late or to early.

 

[Go Wings]

For Detroit yes definitely

 

[QuizGuy66]

Everyone poster: "yes"

/Thread

 

[ohcomeonref]

People acting like coaches are infallible hockey geniuses is weird. Hockey is a well known old boys club, there are plenty of idiots in positions they shouldn't be in.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

People acting like coaches are infallible hockey geniuses is weird. Hockey is a well known old boys club, there are plenty of idiots in positions they shouldn't be in.

Nobody is acting like that.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Like most bosses/managers good coaches tend to know their players strengths and try to help them perform to them. Does that require analytics, I imagine it does. But that's not everything.

The problem is that coaches have biases towards grit and toughness even at the expense of players actually being good. So many people think Ryan Lindgren for example is really good because he takes a beating and is tough. People see gritty GOOD teams win the cup and think all you need is grit and forget the part about being good. Stats tell you more than your eye test for literally everyone on earth as we all have biases. Stats of course aren't perfect but this is why I think retail analytics can be better than more complicated shit that has more room to deceive you. If you're on the ice for 65% shot attempts and 65% expected goals you're better than someone who does both at a 45% level. There's no eye test by any expert that would make that fact not so.

 

[Voight]

Rangers fans told us Gallant was a top coach, then they said Lavi was one of the best coaches... how quick they turn on their men behind the bench.

 

[Tie Domi Esquire]

How is this not a troll thread?

 

[Pablo El Perro]

The problem is that coaches have biases towards grit and toughness even at the expense of players actually being good. So many people think Ryan Lindgren for example is really good because he takes a beating and is tough. People see gritty GOOD teams win the cup and think all you need is grit and forget the part about being good. Stats tell you more than your eye test for literally everyone on earth as we all have biases. Stats of course aren't perfect but this is why I think retail analytics can be better than more complicated shit that has more room to deceive you. If you're on the ice for 65% shot attempts and 65% expected goals you're better than someone who does both at a 45% level. There's no eye test by any expert that would make that fact not so.

Some coaches do. Even those gritty teams that win cups have skilled players who tend to get more minutes than players like Lindgren. So, if you are critiquing Lindgren getting more minutes than better options, point against said coach. But in their cup runs, Kopitar got significant minutes for the Kings (and that was a Suter team), Eichel more than Kolesar, Barkov more than Lomberg. Those are just 3 teams with the big, tough rep who won cups. In sum, I'm not sure what you are arguing.

 

[Maliks PlusMinus]

Rangers fans told us Gallant was a top coach, then they said Lavi was one of the best coaches... how quick they turn on their men behind the bench.

Who? Laviolette has been excellent for us. Surely you don’t think the whole fanbase believes all coaches are morons and that all you have to do is follow analytics to know what to do.