-Well, he seems to be a tougher guy that is more hands on.
So the complete opposite of Hakstol in that regard.
Though, as others have mentioned. he's pretty good in the regular season but not so much in the playoffs.
And if that's what we're looking for we could just bring in Bruce Baudreau.
At least the interviews would be fun with him doing his thing and reporters trying very hard to cancel out his F-Bombs....
Boudreau would be amazing for sheer entertainment value, I wouldn't miss a single presser... but he's really not much of a playoff coach either. He's had more success than Evason though. We're kind of screwed in our options. Either you've got successful coaches who fans would cancel the team for (Babcock, Quenneville) because of some dirt, or whatever, which I understand why you don't hire them. Then you have coaches who consistently underperform in the playoffs, or coaches who have little to no playoff experience.
I think it's important for us also to remember that our GM has had exactly one season as GM of a team that experienced playoff hockey and it was with the Kraken (I'm right aren't I? I didn't verify that claim, but feel as though I've made it before).
At any rate, are there any coaches available who have had playoff success and don't have a bunch of dirt on them?
Oh... yes... Disco Dan and one could argue Todd McLellan, though unlike Dan, his name isn't on the Cup.
Just some stats on Disco Dan
NHL Seasons as Head Coach - 8
NHL Playoffs Appearances - 6
Regular Season 320-190-55
Playoffs 78-78 - .500
Times Advancing to Round 2 vs. Times Eliminated in Round 1 - 6-0
Stanley Cups - 1
35 of those playoff losses were overtime losses. That's a substantial note. That's where the risk is. Also, Buffalo always wants to believe they are good, but they haven't been for a very long time so let's not pretend the only 2 seasons he had as coach of a team that missed the playoffs wouldn't have happened with Scotty f***ing Bowman as their coach.
Now... let's compare to the other options being floated out there:
Todd McLellan
NHL Seasons as Head Coach - 16
NHL Playoffs Appearances - 9
Regular Season 598-412-134
Playoffs 42-46 - .477
Times Advancing to Round 2 vs. Times Eliminated in Round 1 - 6-3
Stanley Cups -
Dean Evason
NHL Seasons as Head Coach - 5
NHL Playoffs Appearances - 4
Regular Season 147-77-27
Playoffs 8-15
Times Advancing to Round 2 vs. Times Eliminated in Round 1 - 1-3
Stanley Cups - 0
Jay Leach
NHL Seasons as Head Coach - 0
NHL Playoffs Appearances - 0
Regular Season 0-0-0
Playoffs 0-0
Times Advancing to Round 2 vs. Times Eliminated in Round 1 - 0-0
Stanley Cups - 0
Some stats to stew on. All of that said and both Dan and Todd McLellan had success with teams known to be stacked and one could argue that aside from Dan's first season, neither lived up to their potential, but I don't think that's fair to McLellan at all. There were other much better teams in the NHL, winning the Stanley Cup when he was coaching the Sharks. Those Blackhawks and Kings teams were damn good and deserved their success.
After that McLellan had a young Oilers team that wasn't great on the whole. He also had some decent regular season success with an aged Kings team that I felt outperformed their potential after the 2 shortened seasons and he was fired when the Kings were 23-15-10 at the start of this season and I think in 2nd place in the Pacific. The ended up making the playoffs by performing 21-12-1 after he was fired, which isn't a ton better, but those OTL's under McLellan do stand out.
At any rate, after looking at this, in no way do I go with Evason, both stylistically and historically. You don't go with Leach, because you have too much to lose, so I'm torn between Bylsma and McLellan of the coaches that have been linked.
Just