Speculation: Lalonde

[Euro Twins]

Interesting that they suspended him for trying to do something about it... Usually punishments result from wrongdoing.

Yup it is interesting. But it's all in the documents from the investigation. He went into a meeting that all the upper management was having and demanded they fire him immediately after finding out. They told him it would be handled. They waited until after the cup run to fire him.

Quenneville should have went over their heads after he wasn't immediately terminated. That's his biggest fault and I'll give you that.

 

[rangersblues]

Kane, full year. Tarasanko, Raymond breaking out, Danielson taking over the #2 center spot. Things are trending in the right direction.


He will be in the D all year. Buy your post season seats now, before the rush.

I think it's a little optimistic to say Danielson will be the number 2 center. But having Kane both in the locker room and on the ice for the whole year is a huge deal. He'll teach a lot of these kids how to be pros.

 

[Winged Wheel Willy]

No he did not.

He was the only one who tried to do something about it.

Was not aware of that. But that shows you how deep the loyalties in the old boys club run. Cuz i remember the presser just before he got let go in FLA, when he basically said that he felt the entire thing would be a distraction. He covered for the f*** ups of his buddies in upper management.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Lalonde is 100% on the hot seat, this season is make or break for him in Detroit. Couple reasons why I think that:

1) The team missed the playoffs by one single point last season. Were it not for two, I repeat, two prolonged losing streaks where the entire team played like garbage, they would have made the playoffs. It wasn't a matter of a handful of players you could legitimately point to and scapegoat, it was essentially the entire team. That's on the coach. If that happens again this season he's gone.​

Were it not for multiple winning streaks and prolonged periods of strong play they wouldn’t have been close.

Do you blame the coach for losses but give no credit for wins? Why?
And did you look at last year’s roster and view them as a bonafide playoff team? If so you were probably higher on them than 99.9% of people were. Most saw them as a 85-90’ish point team, maybe 87-92 for more optimistic people. If anything Lalonde got more than expected out of them.

 

[Electric Eric]

Yup it is interesting. But it's all in the documents from the investigation. He went into a meeting that all the upper management was having and demanded they fire him immediately after finding out. They told him it would be handled. They waited until after the cup run to fire him.

Quenneville should have went over their heads after he wasn't immediately terminated. That's his biggest fault and I'll give you that.

Was that before or after he lied about not having any idea about the incident when it first came out in the media?

Quenneville denied once Kyle Beach's accusations came to light in 2021 that he had any knowledge of being told about the incident in 2010. The team's internal investigation done by the Jenner & Block law firm revealed that Quenneville was not only told about the incident by general manager Stan Bowman, but he “shook his head and said that it was hard for the team to get where they are and they could not deal with (the allegations) now.”

https://thehockeynews.com/news/im-not-blaming-anybody-joel-quenneville-speaks-over-two-years-after-blackhawks-scandal

He's no saint and shouldn't be treated as such nor welcome with open arms to the Wings locker room.

 

[The Zermanator]

Were it not for multiple winning streaks and prolonged periods of strong play they wouldn’t have been close.

Do you blame the coach for losses but give no credit for wins? Why?
And did you look at last year’s roster and view them as a bonafide playoff team? If so you were probably higher on them than 99.9% of people were. Most saw them as a 85-90’ish point team, maybe 87-92 for more optimistic people. If anything Lalonde got more than expected out of them.

This is pure conjecture, nowhere have I said this. But winning streaks happen for every team, especially teams that have as much talent as the Wings do. Losing streaks like we saw are unacceptable for any team, even the bottom feeders.

A consistent baseline is the minimum expectation, that the team comes out with a game plan they're ready to execute. Winning streaks are a cherry on top. Losing streaks happen, but the spiral needs to be corrected quickly. That's not what happened. Month+ losing streaks are simply unacceptable. To excuse that is just a loser mentality, accepting the unacceptable. I think we should set our sights a little higher than that for the Wings. So yeah I expected, and expect, better than what occurred last season.

And yes I did see last year's team as playoff capable. What matters is the team on the ice, not what 99.9% of people here think. Were you not watching the games? Because if you ignore 2 months of the season that never should have happened, they're a playoff team with home ice advantage. If those losing streaks were half as long as they were (which still would have been too long), they still would have been a comfortable playoff team. They missed the playoffs by 1 point in a season where they pissed away most of the available points over an entire 2 months of a roughly 7 month season. That's almost 1/3 of the entire season. The team spiralled more than once and Lalonde had no answer.

 

[Pavels Dog]

This is pure conjecture, nowhere have I said this. But winning streaks happen for every team, especially teams that have as much talent as the Wings do. Losing streaks like we saw are unacceptable for any team, even the bottom feeders.

A consistent baseline is the minimum expectation, that the team comes out with a game plan they're ready to execute. Winning streaks are a cherry on top. Losing streaks happen, but the spiral needs to be corrected quickly. That's not what happened. Month+ losing streaks are simply unacceptable. To excuse that is just a loser mentality, accepting the unacceptable. I think we should set our sights a little higher than that for the Wings. So yeah I expected, and expect, better than what occurred last season.

And yes I did see last year's team as playoff capable. What matters is the team on the ice, not what 99.9% of people here think. Were you not watching the games? Because if you ignore 2 months of the season that never should have happened, they're a playoff team with home ice advantage. If those losing streaks were half as long as they were (which still would have been too long), they still would have been a comfortable playoff team. They missed the playoffs by 1 point in a season where they pissed away most of the available points over an entire 2 months of a roughly 7 month season. That's almost 1/3 of the entire season. The team spiralled more than once and Lalonde had no answer.

Losing streaks are also inevitable for teams playing their 3rd string goalie and losing their #1C for extended periods. Sounds like you’re expecting Lalonde to just coach his way around having Copp or Veleno as #1C and Reimer in net.

 

[The Zermanator]

Losing streaks are also inevitable for teams playing their 3rd string goalie and losing their #1C for extended periods. Sounds like you’re expecting Lalonde to just coach his way around having Copp or Veleno as #1C and Reimer in net.

Yeah, injuries happen and they need to be dealt with. The fact that it happened twice undercuts your argument. Larkin wasn't out for the first one. But if you're starting from the position that those losing streaks were acceptable and bound to happen, then I doubt there's anything I could say to convince you anyway. I expect more out of the coach than what I saw for 1/3 of the season.

 

[dalem177]

In life, some people are good captains as well as good first officers. This is fairly rare and usually must be nurtured. I have no doubt that Larks is turning into a solid captain. I expect he was a pretty good first officer as well. On last year's team it seems that Perron was a good first officer but maybe not a great captain.

Etc. etc. as I stretch the analogy too much, but I think it was obvious they lacked a solid first officer who could rally the team behind him while the captain was down.

True leadership is hard.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Yup it is interesting. But it's all in the documents from the investigation. He went into a meeting that all the upper management was having and demanded they fire him immediately after finding out. They told him it would be handled. They waited until after the cup run to fire him.

Quenneville should have went over their heads after he wasn't immediately terminated. That's his biggest fault and I'll give you that.

B.S.
The guy was a part of Quenneville's coaching staff. If Q wanted him out of the locker room and denied access to the players, it would have happened. He might have said something, but who gives a shit, when he did nothing?
Then there's the denial after it came to light followed by him making like he's a victim.

 

[OldnotDeadWings]

The fly in the ointment for many of those blaming Lalonde for the failure to make the playoffs and thus vulnerable now, is their mistaken belief the team is skilled enough to justify playoff expectations. They're not. They vastly outperformed their skill level last season and were only close to making the playoffs because of PP effectiveness, third-period comebacks, a terrible Metro Division and dysfunctional teams in their own Division.

What do skilled teams do? They create quality scoring chances. The Wings last season, according to Natural Stat Trick, tied with Chicago for the league's fewest High Danger Chances 5v5. That's not a one-year blip. The year before they had the second-fewest, ahead of only Chicago. Their differential in High Danger chances created and given up last season (minus-140) was in the bottom 10 in the league, It was minus-168 the previous season. There are exceptions, but you generally need to get fairly close to a zero differential to have a realistic shot of making the playoffs. Last season 14 of 16 teams had a positive differential.

The Wings lacked talent in goal (the second-worst Save Pct on High Danger chances); their D lacked ability to initiate/execute controlled zone exits, usually a necessary precursor to controlled zone entries; too many of their forwards lacked puck possession skill They made up some of the talent deficit by outscoring all but five teams on the PP, just one less goal than the Oilers, who to me at least seemed more than one goal better with the man-advantage over 82 games. They made up some of the talent deficit with late-game heroics. You don't have as many wins when trailing after two periods as the Wings had (league-leading 11) or league-best third-period comebacks overall (14 IIRC) unless there is a high level of collective faith it can be done and the shift after shift work rate to make it happen. Good special teams and the will and work rate to win a high number of games they easily could have lost -- in some people's minds, that might indicate good coaching and players buying into what a coach is selling.

What teams are most susceptible to long losing streaks? Bad teams. Teams with not enough talent to make up for bad goaltending or the absence of one of their few good players. With not enough talent to eke out a win when their effort/execution level predictably drops for X number of games. Lalonde's job is vulnerable because all coaches are vulnerable, especially those with bad, mediocre or overrated rosters. A long losing streak for any of those teams could result in the coach being fired.

They might sneak into the playoffs next season with a lot of help and more of the same things that got them close last season, but they're a long way from coaching quality being the primary reason for coming up short. Last season, if you look at the big picture of talent disparity rather than getting tangled up in the weeds of immediate post-game and post-season complaints, coaching quality helped keep them in it.

 

[norrisnick]

The fly in the ointment for many of those blaming Lalonde for the failure to make the playoffs and thus vulnerable now, is their mistaken belief the team is skilled enough to justify playoff expectations. They're not. They vastly outperformed their skill level last season and were only close to making the playoffs because of PP effectiveness, third-period comebacks, a terrible Metro Division and dysfunctional teams in their own Division.

What do skilled teams do? They create quality scoring chances. The Wings last season, according to Natural Stat Trick, tied with Chicago for the league's fewest High Danger Chances 5v5. That's not a one-year blip. The year before they had the second-fewest, ahead of only Chicago. Their differential in High Danger chances created and given up last season (minus-140) was in the bottom 10 in the league, It was minus-168 the previous season. There are exceptions, but you generally need to get fairly close to a zero differential to have a realistic shot of making the playoffs. Last season 14 of 16 teams had a positive differential.

The Wings lacked talent in goal (the second-worst Save Pct on High Danger chances); their D lacked ability to initiate/execute controlled zone exits, usually a necessary precursor to controlled zone entries; too many of their forwards lacked puck possession skill They made up some of the talent deficit by outscoring all but five teams on the PP, just one less goal than the Oilers, who to me at least seemed more than one goal better with the man-advantage over 82 games. They made up some of the talent deficit with late-game heroics. You don't have as many wins when trailing after two periods as the Wings had (league-leading 11) or league-best third-period comebacks overall (14 IIRC) unless there is a high level of collective faith it can be done and the shift after shift work rate to make it happen. Good special teams and the will and work rate to win a high number of games they easily could have lost -- in some people's minds, that might indicate good coaching and players buying into what a coach is selling.

What teams are most susceptible to long losing streaks? Bad teams. Teams with not enough talent to make up for bad goaltending or the absence of one of their few good players. With not enough talent to eke out a win when their effort/execution level predictably drops for X number of games. Lalonde's job is vulnerable because all coaches are vulnerable, especially those with bad, mediocre or overrated rosters. A long losing streak for any of those teams could result in the coach being fired.

They might sneak into the playoffs next season with a lot of help and more of the same things that got them close last season, but they're a long way from coaching quality being the primary reason for coming up short. Last season, if you look at the big picture of talent disparity rather than getting tangled up in the weeds of immediate post-game and post-season complaints, coaching quality helped keep them in it.

Systems can succeed where individual talent cannot. Can anyone point out to what controlled breakout system the team is trying to institute beyond rim-arounds and chips out of the zone? Lalonde critiqued Ed at times for holding on to the puck trying to make a controlled play (even on plays where he succeeded). I'm thinking the system is garbage and hence the breakouts are garbage. Forwards aren't in place and/or looking for passes because they aren't supposed to be open and ready for passes. They all turn up ice or park along the boards just below the blueline for the inevitable rim or chip.

 

[19 for president]

Lalonde is on the hot seat if the entire team goes on extended losing streaks where the look like they have all forgotten how to play hockey.

Sometimes you get hit by the injury bug and lose a key player or two that really hurts your ability to score, but that is on the coaches to make an adjustment. Maybe you have to play 1-3-1 for a few weeks and really buckle down defensively and hope you can win by a goal. You shouldn't be losing games by 4-5 goals like we did in March. The same can be said about the quality of opponent they lost to in Dec. Most of those were similarly skilled or worse teams. Again you have to make some adjustments and eek out some of those points. It's one thing to lose 3-4 in a row if its Flor/TB/Boston/Tor run another if its Anh/SJ/Ott/etc.

Lalonde often sounded very defeatist to me last year in interviews, and like he didn't believe in the team. I don't like that from a coach of a younger team. Let Stevie play realist. Lalonde needs to be saying this team should make the playoffs and holding guys accountable.

I can handle this team not making the playoffs next year if they improve their overall play and consistency. Other teams with more skill have improved so we may not make it, but it shouldn't be to deficiencies in the basics.

 

[lilidk]

Why was Philadelphia as good as Detroit last season if we had much talented team.

 

[norrisnick]

Why was Philadelphia as good as Detroit last season if we had much talented team.

Shots for and against. Philly was +483. We were -282.

 

[OldnotDeadWings]

Systems can succeed where individual talent cannot. Can anyone point out to what controlled breakout system the team is trying to institute beyond rim-arounds and chips out of the zone? Lalonde critiqued Ed at times for holding on to the puck trying to make a controlled play (even on plays where he succeeded). I'm thinking the system is garbage and hence the breakouts are garbage. Forwards aren't in place and/or looking for passes because they aren't supposed to be open and ready for passes. They all turn up ice or park along the boards just below the blueline for the inevitable rim or chip.

Systems can mitigate talent deficit, certainly. Look at how effective Nashville was with very little talent up front. They were also helped immeasurably by having one of the best puck-moving D in the league. Relatively equal teams are often separated only by how well systems work or the specific matchup of those systems.


In Detroit's case with breakouts, it started with opposing teams focusing on a heavy forecheck, forcing D to move the puck quickly. None of their D are elusive enough on their own to consistently retrieve, evade and skate the puck out. I thought Ed was great with some of the quick and skilled decisions he made moving the puck. There are no magical systems though that eliminate the need for at least a minimal amount of skill. The number of wingers on the team last year capable of winning /controlling puck possession on the boards, either by getting to the right spot on time or outmuscling the opponent, AND then doing something consistently good with the puck, I counted to be two, Raymond and Perron. All the rest IMO lacked one of the two necessary skill elements for controlled zone exits. Kane started figuring things out later in the season by coming back deeper, but he's never going to be great in contested board battles.

 

[norrisnick]

Systems can mitigate talent deficit, certainly. Look at how effective Nashville was with very little talent up front. They were also helped immeasurably by having one of the best puck-moving D in the league. Relatively equal teams are often separated only by how well systems work or the specific matchup of those systems.


In Detroit's case with breakouts, it started with opposing teams focusing on a heavy forecheck, forcing D to move the puck quickly. None of their D are elusive enough on their own to consistently retrieve, evade and skate the puck out. I thought Ed was great with some of the quick and skilled decisions he made moving the puck. There are no magical systems though that eliminate the need for at least a minimal amount of skill. The number of wingers on the team last year capable of winning /controlling puck possession on the boards, either by getting to the right spot on time or outmuscling the opponent, AND then doing something consistently good with the puck, I counted to be two, Raymond and Perron. All the rest IMO lacked one of the two necessary skill elements for controlled zone exits. Kane started figuring things out later in the season by coming back deeper, but he's never going to be great in contested board battles.

There is a happy medium between the '08 Wings breakouts and blind rims and flips. And if Lalonde cannot come up with something more effective than what we have now with who we have now... That's not a great look. Worse bluelines than ours have been respectable. And if our D are uncoachable... Raise hell until you get guys that are. But just accepting what we have...

 

[OldnotDeadWings]

There is a happy medium between the '08 Wings breakouts and blind rims and flips. And if Lalonde cannot come up with something more effective than what we have now with who we have now... That's not a great look. Worse bluelines than ours have been respectable. And if our D are uncoachable... Raise hell until you get guys that are. But just accepting what we have...

You're absoplutely right, what we had last year in terms of getting possession started and low quality d-zone play is not acceptable going forward. I've had that discussion before, saying Lalonde has to bear some of that responsibility. The talent disparity is the main reason I think for keeping Kane, adding Tarasenko, maybe giving Berggren a full shot, Ghost's replacement having some of the same skill level, improving in goal. Those are all okayish or good moves. But to me the primary team focus has to be becoming better in their own zone and getting closer to an acceptable if not always happy medium.

 

[heyfolks]

I think it's a little optimistic to say Danielson will be the number 2 center. But having Kane both in the locker room and on the ice for the whole year is a huge deal. He'll teach a lot of these kids how to be pros.

If you can't be an optimist in July, you have no hope.

 

[Bench]

Well we missed out on the ultimate goalie and coach Patrick Roy, so we might as well just stick with Lalo Land here.

 

[PajamaBoy]

Quenneville Jesus f***ing Christ.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I think it's a little optimistic to say Danielson will be the number 2 center. But having Kane both in the locker room and on the ice for the whole year is a huge deal. He'll teach a lot of these kids how to be pros.

You put Danielson likely with Copp or Veleno where he takes the dominant faceoff draws and plays out on the wing. Let him earn more ice time, which he will likely do because of his ability to make controlled entries while not giving up too much defensively. The think about the Karate Kid is he is a guy coaches like and he will have special teams PK versatility this year even in the NHL. It is why I keep thinking much like Raymond and Larkin did that he is about to kick the door down on somebody.

I guess we will see, but I see Lalonde liking him to be honest. I am curious what changes this year, I thought Lalonde improved a decent amount year 1 to year 2. He needs to take a similar step in year 3. One of the more curious things especially given the goalie background, is that the Cooper, Blash, Lalonder tree really has some curious goalie deployment issues...

 

[PajamaBoy]

Honestly as much as I'd love to get Gallant here, it's brutal to think about him inevitably getting fired by Yzerman somewhere along the line.

If we going to bring Gallant in do it when we have a very strong contending team and hopefully win a cup or two or few

Gallant omg .... This boards gone full terminal. Awful awful suggestions

 

[The Zermanator]

Gallant omg .... This boards gone full terminal. Awful awful suggestions

He's either won or been a finalist for the Jack Adams at his 3 previous teams...

 

[raymond23]

You put Danielson likely with Copp or Veleno where he takes the dominant faceoff draws and plays out on the wing. Let him earn more ice time, which he will likely do because of his ability to make controlled entries while not giving up too much defensively. The think about the Karate Kid is he is a guy coaches like and he will have special teams PK versatility this year even in the NHL. It is why I keep thinking much like Raymond and Larkin did that he is about to kick the door down on somebody.

I guess we will see, but I see Lalonde liking him to be honest. I am curious what changes this year, I thought Lalonde improved a decent amount year 1 to year 2. He needs to take a similar step in year 3. One of the more curious things especially given the goalie background, is that the Cooper, Blash, Lalonder tree really has some curious goalie deployment issues...

Sounds a lot like Larkin in his rookie role, though I'm not sure he took many faceoffs?

Danielson surpassing expectations would be such a huge win for this team. I really hope you're right, his transition ability is desperately needed