When it comes to coaches, I think longevity and total wins are a couple categories that people look to in order to shape their perception over the long haul.
Cooper currently sits 44th in all time wins and 27th in games coached.
He's still needs to write a few more chapters to get build up his resume in that top tier of coaching greats (perception wise).
One thing I will say about Cooper though is that he is an example of how the way we look at voting for Jack adams is flawed. When it's basically an award given to the guy who happens to be there for a big turnaround, it ignores good coaches who happen to coach good teams.
“Substitution bias” as psychologist Daniel Kahneman calls it. It’s impossible to realistically have any legitimate outside perspective as to who “the best” coach is, so voters instead go off of “which team played the furthest above where they were expected to play?”
It’s why a lot of these awards are very silly. A guy is considered the best coach in the best hockey league in the world one year and then he’s fired the very next season. Perhaps the team just beat expectations in spite of said coach.
Truth is it’s incredibly difficult to tell how “good” of a coach Cooper really is. He was considered a choker for years because his very good roster couldn’t advance. Then, when they finally won, he suddenly transitioned to “league’s best coach”.
If we’re being realistic, we’re all just throwing shit at the wall.