Jared Bednar Discussion

[redacted]

I have extensively. Go ahead and compare their gf/ga per game and or their relative differential. You’ll find, again, they’re in the same neighborhood as the past three cup winning teams and trending upwards every year. There aren’t any signs of regression.

I asked you to elaborate on how playing so that you don't need to come from behind show more in game adjustments than having to come from behind. I bolded it in the quote, if you have elaborated on that, please link.

 

[Moosehead1]

I asked you to elaborate on how playing so that you don't need to come from behind show more in game adjustments than having to come from behind. I bolded it in the quote, if you have elaborated on that, please link.

I’m not going to present my entire argument for you again, that’s also absurd.

 

[redacted]

I’m not going to present my entire argument for you again, that’s also absurd.

You didn't present that argument once.

 

[Moosehead1]

You didn't present that argument once.

That’s also not true

 

[redacted]

That’s also not true

But it really is true. You haven't explained why being up late shows more in game adjustments. I'd like to hear why that is tactically the case.

 

[Foppa2118]

It is clear... Bednar is great at x's and o's, terrible at adjustments. They are bottom of the league in his tenure when losing after any period. There are blips in the 2nd period, but the 3rd period is bottom 5 in all but one season. The Avs are elite at getting the first goal and middle pack to top 10 at holding on to the win.

Do me a favor though and do the simple math on the win percentage of the Avs and Detroit when losing after 2 periods. Do the same with Tampa.

I really think it's misleading to keep going back to Bednar's record during his tenure that includes the Avs worst season in 25 years. At the very least we need to throw out this season for this discussion.

The most relevant season by far in this discussion is last year. It's the most recent, it's the best team he had, and it's a 70 game sample size. And last year, Bednar and the Avs were one of the best teams in the league at comebacks.

Why didn't we praise Bednar last year for being GREAT at adjusting and coming back in games? That would have been the fair thing to do if we're relying on stats to judge him in this area.

The 16 flukey game sample size from this year is meaningless in this discussion. They've only had 3 losses so far when trailing after 1 period. Only 4 losses when trailing first. The best teams in the league have 1 and 2 losses in each. Not a big difference.

We've also moved on to Bednar's record after two periods now, instead of his record trailing after 1 period, and after trailing first. Where Bednar was 4th in winning % when trailing first and 6th in winning % when trailing after 1 period last year.

They didn't have a good winning percentage last year when trailing after two, but they also had the 2nd fewest number of losses when trailing after two with 13. Vegas in comparison had 21 losses. Dallas had 19. Tampa had 15. Washington the team with the best winning % when trailing after two periods had 17 losses.

So I really don't think his record after 2 is a very strong point in this discussion either.

This is a man who has won championships with two different teams in two different leagues. You have to be at least competent at adjustments to be able to do that.

 

[Pokecheque]

It's fascinating to see how a guy like Bednar approaches the game vs. a guy like Cooper, or Julien. All very different from one another, all successful bench bosses.

I guess one question to ask is, does one need to be an elite coach to win a Stanley Cup? Obviously it helps but the answer is also very obvious: No. The next question to ask is whether or not Jared Bednar is a good enough coach for the Avs to win it all. I guess that remains to be seen but I think so.

Not all coaches are good at all the things. Even a super-elite coach like Quenneville seems to struggle with icing a competent power play, even when he's handed gobs of talent, whereas that's about the one thing IMO that Tony Granato is pretty good at. Bednar remains a favorite of mine because he's anti-old school and utilizes a system that takes perfect advantage of the speed and talent at his disposal. That said, I would like to see him make wholesale changes to the power play (and that may require a change in assistants), adjustments to the penalty kill, and more emphasis on net-front play.

Interesting to note that in last night's presser, Bednar said that both JTC and Nuke have had numerous individual meetings with the coaches where they went over what they've been doing wrong and were shown video of past play where they were more effective. Also, TMV asked if there was a limit as to how much the team will tolerate bad play from the rookies (the question included Byram but was clearly about Timmins) and Bednar acknowledged there is indeed a limit. I am glad he's a guy who tries to let players play through their extended slumps, frustrating as it is to see sometimes.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

The main thing I’m looking for in a coach is, does the coach get enough out of the talent he’s given. That’s really what it comes down to for me.

Bednar did an excellent job last year considering the injuries.

So far this season, I’d say he’s getting less out of the roster then what I’d like to see. It’s too small of a sample size for me to want to get rid of him at this stage.

 

[Balthazar]

So, why does this happen every season? I’m not saying this is that slump... just that this slump always happens and it is a very similar cycle... every year.

The slump happens when Grubauer becomes unexplicably awful for a 6-7 games. Every year.

 

[Moosehead1]

I really think it's misleading to keep going back to Bednar's record during his tenure that includes the Avs worst season in 25 years. At the very least we need to throw out this season for this discussion.

The most relevant season by far in this discussion is last year. It's the most recent, it's the best team he had, and it's a 70 game sample size. And last year, Bednar and the Avs were one of the best teams in the league at comebacks.

Why didn't we praise Bednar last year for being GREAT at adjusting and coming back in games? That would have been the fair thing to do if we're relying on stats to judge him in this area.

The 16 flukey game sample size from this year is meaningless in this discussion. They've only had 3 losses so far when trailing after 1 period. Only 4 losses when trailing first. The best teams in the league have 1 and 2 losses in each. Not a big difference.

We've also moved on to Bednar's record after two periods now, instead of his record trailing after 1 period, and after trailing first. Where Bednar was 4th in winning % when trailing first and 6th in winning % when trailing after 1 period last year.

They didn't have a good winning percentage last year when trailing after two, but they also had the 2nd fewest number of losses when trailing after two with 13. Vegas in comparison had 21 losses. Dallas had 19. Tampa had 15. Washington the team with the best winning % when trailing after two periods had 17 losses.

So I really don't think his record after 2 is a very strong point in this discussion either.

This is a man who has won championships with two different teams in two different leagues. You have to be at least competent at adjustments to be able to do that.

Fully agree with you.

I was using the ‘trailing after two’ (which the avs very rarely did) was a good indicator that a) they prepared well during and before games in a manner that allowed them not to have to play catch up hockey and B) that the percentage they win at while leading the games is a huge margin. That stat is a direct contrast to ‘leading after two’, which helps illuminate how well the avs prepare and execute but also adjust.

To me, the argument for lack of adjustment being made and having to come back in the third was misleading - so I wanted to use the same dataset to show that it’s not a fair assessment IMO.

 

[Moosehead1]

It's fascinating to see how a guy like Bednar approaches the game vs. a guy like Cooper, or Julien. All very different from one another, all successful bench bosses.

I guess one question to ask is, does one need to be an elite coach to win a Stanley Cup? Obviously it helps but the answer is also very obvious: No. The next question to ask is whether or not Jared Bednar is a good enough coach for the Avs to win it all. I guess that remains to be seen but I think so.

Not all coaches are good at all the things. Even a super-elite coach like Quenneville seems to struggle with icing a competent power play, even when he's handed gobs of talent, whereas that's about the one thing IMO that Tony Granato is pretty good at. Bednar remains a favorite of mine because he's anti-old school and utilizes a system that takes perfect advantage of the speed and talent at his disposal. That said, I would like to see him make wholesale changes to the power play (and that may require a change in assistants), adjustments to the penalty kill, and more emphasis on net-front play.

Interesting to note that in last night's presser, Bednar said that both JTC and Nuke have had numerous individual meetings with the coaches where they went over what they've been doing wrong and were shown video of past play where they were more effective. Also, TMV asked if there was a limit as to how much the team will tolerate bad play from the rookies (the question included Byram but was clearly about Timmins) and Bednar acknowledged there is indeed a limit. I am glad he's a guy who tries to let players play through their extended slumps, frustrating as it is to see sometimes.

Good post. It is fascinating. I don’t think I’d call quenneville super elite but I digress (and also hold grudges haha).

I think one of bednars strongest feats is that he is an expert at not over coaching. And knowing where that line is.

 

[Foppa2118]

It's fascinating to see how a guy like Bednar approaches the game vs. a guy like Cooper, or Julien. All very different from one another, all successful bench bosses.

I guess one question to ask is, does one need to be an elite coach to win a Stanley Cup? Obviously it helps but the answer is also very obvious: No. The next question to ask is whether or not Jared Bednar is a good enough coach for the Avs to win it all. I guess that remains to be seen but I think so.

Not all coaches are good at all the things. Even a super-elite coach like Quenneville seems to struggle with icing a competent power play, even when he's handed gobs of talent, whereas that's about the one thing IMO that Tony Granato is pretty good at. Bednar remains a favorite of mine because he's anti-old school and utilizes a system that takes perfect advantage of the speed and talent at his disposal. That said, I would like to see him make wholesale changes to the power play (and that may require a change in assistants), adjustments to the penalty kill, and more emphasis on net-front play.

Interesting to note that in last night's presser, Bednar said that both JTC and Nuke have had numerous individual meetings with the coaches where they went over what they've been doing wrong and were shown video of past play where they were more effective. Also, TMV asked if there was a limit as to how much the team will tolerate bad play from the rookies (the question included Byram but was clearly about Timmins) and Bednar acknowledged there is indeed a limit. I am glad he's a guy who tries to let players play through their extended slumps, frustrating as it is to see sometimes.

Couldn't agree more with this. I tend to think coaches get undue blame and credit for a team's success/failure in most cases. There are some situations where it's obvious they should credit credit or blame, but in most cases I think the credit/blame lies mostly with the players.

And just like championship teams can be good power play teams, but awful penalty kill teams, and vice versa, there are things that coaches are good at, and other things they're not as good at. There shouldn't be an expectation that every team/coach is perfect.

All I know is, I don't think I've ever seen an Avalanche team play "hockey" as good as this Bednar team. Those championship teams under Crawford and Hartley may or may not have been better teams, but I don't think they played better hockey.

I think the roster under Roy was the biggest problem, not his coaching, but one of the things his critics said was that the Avs needed a good systems coach to drill it into their heads, until everything was second nature.

That's what Bednar has done to a tee with this team. Most of the team is relatively solid two way players compared to past teams. Every year they've gotten better, and they're finally starting to become a Cup contender.

Last year was the first team the Avs had in forever that was a legit Cup contender, and we're already talking about firing Bednar less than a third into this year, just because the team lost two games in a row for the first time this season. It's way too soon IMO.

 

[Moosehead1]

Last year was the first team the Avs had in forever that was a legit Cup contender, and we're already talking about firing Bednar less than a third into this year, just because the team lost two games in a row for the first time this season. It's way too soon IMO.

That’s where I got a little bit fired up - not only is it too soon it’s just absurd.

Good points about the 96 and 01 teams...the game has changed so much.

 

[Pokecheque]

Couldn't agree more with this. I tend to think coaches get undue blame and credit for a team's success/failure in most cases. There are some situations where it's obvious they should credit credit or blame, but in most cases I think the credit/blame lies mostly with the players.

And just like championship teams can be good power play teams, but awful penalty kill teams, and vice versa, there are things that coaches are good at, and other things they're not as good at. There shouldn't be an expectation that every team/coach is perfect.

All I know is, I don't think I've ever seen an Avalanche team play "hockey" as good as this Bednar team. Those championship teams under Crawford and Hartley may or may not have been better teams, but I don't think they played better hockey.

I think the roster under Roy was the biggest problem, not his coaching, but one of the things his critics said was that the Avs needed a good systems coach to drill it into their heads, until everything was second nature.

That's what Bednar has done to a tee with this team. Most of the team is relatively solid two way players compared to past teams. Every year they've gotten better, and they're finally starting to become a Cup contender.

Last year was the first team the Avs had in forever that was a legit Cup contender, and we're already talking about firing Bednar less than a third into this year, just because the team lost two games in a row for the first time this season. It's way too soon IMO.

I'll just say about Roy is that I really want him to get another shot at the NHL--I'm not confident at all that he'd succeed even given a legit opportunity with the talent he needs, but I'd still like to see it. It'd be fun if nothing else. That Habs team is more or less built the way he kinda/sorta wanted the Avs to be built so maybe Bergevin looks him up. I certainly can't argue with you about the talent he had in Colorado because it obviously just wasn't there.

Good point about Bednar's system. I agree it's probably the cleanest and most efficient one we've ever seen an Avalanche team implement. Bob Hartley's system was pretty much the one that Roy patterned his own after, and it emphasized more shot blocking and aggressive, physical play. Crawford was more firewagon but he also implemented a trap system during his time in Vancouver, I can't remember if that was the case in Denver. The best part about Bednar's defensive system is that it's incredibly effective while not choking the life out of the game. He also doesn't mind toughness, but really frowns on extracurriculars, something AJ Greer can attest to.

 

[redacted]

Fully agree with you.

I was using the ‘trailing after two’ (which the avs very rarely did) was a good indicator that a) they prepared well during and before games in a manner that allowed them not to have to play catch up hockey and B) that the percentage they win at while leading the games is a huge margin. That stat is a direct contrast to ‘leading after two’, which helps illuminate how well the avs prepare and execute but also adjust.

To me, the argument for lack of adjustment being made and having to come back in the third was misleading - so I wanted to use the same dataset to show that it’s not a fair assessment IMO.

A and B are pregame planning and systemic implementation... not in game adjustments. I’ve give a lot of credit to Bednar for A and B. I’ve given Bednar crap for not being able to adjust. You’re not reading the whole debate.

Avs are mid pack for wins with leads after periods too. Not elite... but solid to good. Avs are elite at getting the first goal and leads early.

 

[redacted]

The slump happens when Grubauer becomes unexplicably awful for a 6-7 games. Every year.

It existed before and with Grubs... Varly and Bernier were inconsistent too

 

[Foppa2118]

I'll just say about Roy is that I really want him to get another shot at the NHL--I'm not confident at all that he'd succeed even given a legit opportunity with the talent he needs, but I'd still like to see it. It'd be fun if nothing else. That Habs team is more or less built the way he kinda/sorta wanted the Avs to be built so maybe Bergevin looks him up. I certainly can't argue with you about the talent he had in Colorado because it obviously just wasn't there.

Good point about Bednar's system. I agree it's probably the cleanest and most efficient one we've ever seen an Avalanche team implement. Bob Hartley's system was pretty much the one that Roy patterned his own after, and it emphasized more shot blocking and aggressive, physical play. Crawford was more firewagon but he also implemented a trap system during his time in Vancouver, I can't remember if that was the case in Denver. The best part about Bednar's defensive system is that it's incredibly effective while not choking the life out of the game. He also doesn't mind toughness, but really frowns on extracurriculars, something AJ Greer can attest to.

Seems like Bergevin is gonna go with Ducharme for head coach. Makes total sense. He even dresses like him.

I'm not sure Montreal would be a great fit for Roy anyway. Just seems like another blow up in the making with that pressure cooker. I think he needs to go to a somewhat veteran team, and it might be best if it's not a big market team either.

I think he needs to be able to make a team his own to have success. If he's not on the same page with the GM, or they're continually rebuilding/resetting, then it's not going to work, like we saw here.

 

[Moosehead1]

A and B are pregame planning and systemic implementation... not in game adjustments. I’ve give a lot of credit to Bednar for A and B. I’ve given Bednar crap for not being able to adjust. You’re not reading the whole debate.

Avs are mid pack for wins with leads after periods too. Not elite... but solid to good. Avs are elite at getting the first goal and leads early.

Look man I fully and completely disagree with you. I’ve read every word of every stat and interpretation of said stat that you’ve posted and in my opinion you present and cherry pick data that is unfair. I will agree to disagree with you.

Your data is real but it lacks integrity.

 

[Moosehead1]

Seems like Bergevin is gonna go with Ducharme for head coach. Makes total sense. He even dresses like him.

I'm not sure Montreal would be a great fit for Roy anyway. Just seems like another blow up in the making with that pressure cooker. I think he needs to go to a somewhat veteran team, and it might be best if it's not a big market team either.

I think he needs to be able to make a team his own to have success. If he's not on the same page with the GM, or they're continually rebuilding/resetting, then it's not going to work, like we saw here.

Side note bergevin giving rycroft a run for his money?

 

[redacted]

Look man I fully and completely disagree with you. I’ve read every word of every stat and interpretation of said stat that you’ve posted and in my opinion you present and cherry pick data that is unfair. I will agree to disagree with you.

Your data is real but it lacks integrity.

Wow.. okay dude.

 

[Pokecheque]

Seems like Bergevin is gonna go with Ducharme for head coach. Makes total sense. He even dresses like him.

I'm not sure Montreal would be a great fit for Roy anyway. Just seems like another blow up in the making with that pressure cooker. I think he needs to go to a somewhat veteran team, and it might be best if it's not a big market team either.

I think he needs to be able to make a team his own to have success. If he's not on the same page with the GM, or they're continually rebuilding/resetting, then it's not going to work, like we saw here.

Oh, I don't think they're gonna blow it up after how long Bergevin has tinkered with that roster. This is technically his first "go for it" year. Before he left a lot of cap space on the table. This year's Habs team, live or die, is the one Bergevin ultimately envisioned when he first took the reins.

It's got a big, physical defense that doesn't emphasize jumping into the play, it's got a balanced roster with plenty of talent and snarl, the only thing it really lacks is a gamebreaking talent. I think he'd love to have a roster like that. I don't think a coach/GM role is possible in the NHL anymore, and he can't have that weird hybrid role because that sure as hell didn't work.

 

[Foppa2118]

Oh, I don't think they're gonna blow it up after how long Bergevin has tinkered with that roster. This is technically his first "go for it" year. Before he left a lot of cap space on the table. This year's Habs team, live or die, is the one Bergevin ultimately envisioned when he first took the reins.

It's got a big, physical defense that doesn't emphasize jumping into the play, it's got a balanced roster with plenty of talent and snarl, the only thing it really lacks is a gamebreaking talent. I think he'd love to have a roster like that. I don't think a coach/GM role is possible in the NHL anymore, and he can't have that weird hybrid role because that sure as hell didn't work.

I didn't mean blow up in that sense. I meant Roy would probably be destined for another drama filled explosive exit the way he left the first time, because it's Montreal.

 

[LTC Pain]

So, if the offense remains somewhat "stale" and losses continue, what is the threshold for Bednar to be on the coaching hotseat???

 

[The Abusement Park]

So, if the offense remains somewhat "stale" and losses continue, what is the threshold for Bednar to be on the coaching hotseat???

He should get the rest of the season. If the Avs bow out in the 1st or 2nd round than I think he should be let go personally, but that’s a long time aways.

 

[cinchronicity]

Playing the same teams 8 times this year is definitely a coaching battle. The pp needs to get going this has gone in far to long. I think bednar can get it done, in a few weeks we will be laughing at this thread. The locker room is tight knit leadership is string and cohesive. The boys got this the sky is not falling.

It may be a coaching battle, but it is a battle which needs to happen each and every year if a team wants a Stanley Cup. We've gone out in a game 7 two years running, and that is largely because Bednar was predictable and was outcoached. Same thing with the recent Vegas series. It is as obvious as the day is long. It took Bednar 3 years to figure out a DZone exit strategy. He still hasn't figured out a quality ( and by 'a'a I mean several variations) PP strategy. And his penchant for moving lines around as a strategy is both dumb and wearing thin. He gets outcoached on a daily basis and that is no strategy to win a cup.