Proposal: Next Bruins Coach - Let's discuss.

[Nose Face Killah]

what about randy carlyle?

 

[Ten Thousand Hours]

Can't lie, reading that stuff about how he likes 'up tempo/in your face' hockey is pretty sweet. However, how would pros respond to that sort of coaching style? From the reading I've read, it seems like he's a perfect college coach. He's on the young side and commands respect by being a bit harder on his players. I can't say I really know what it's like to be a coach, so I can't accurately say what would happen if he got the job, but I'd be interested to see how the vets respond to a guy like that.

Maybe an outsider is what this team needs. Hell, it has worked well for the Celtics. They had Doc for a long time after success too.

Any player that's not open to a new approach after missing the playoffs twice isn't a player worth keeping. And we should turn over the roster and have more youth anyways. Leaman seems to make a lot of sense.

 

[Bread and Circuses]

Not that I want Oates , but some people hve stated Joel Quenville was horrible in STL and COL before going to the Hawks . Its all about the right place at the right time.

I would never ever want him as a head coach.

I'd like oates as a special teams/skills guy assistant coach, especially if we keep Julien.

This is what he has proved he excels at.

 

[crimsonace]

Not that I want Oates , but some people hve stated Joel Quenville was horrible in STL and COL before going to the Hawks . Its all about the right place at the right time.

Quenneville won a Presidents Trophy, a Jack Adams Award in STL & took the Blues to the conference final the next year (where they lost to Ray Bourque & Colorado) with Roman Turek as his #1 goalie. Thought it was a mistake when the Blues turfed him. Won a couple of playoff rounds in Colorado with a team at the end of its window. Guy was a great coach - and still is.

 

[GarbageGoal]

Yeah, I dunno who was bashing Q, but sounds like sour grapes. I felt he was dismissed too soon both times.

 

[ODAAT]

Fresh face might be the way to go if CJ is moved, but I`m always skeptical, I recall a time when Dallas Eakins was considered to be a guy who could do wonders with kids too

 

[BruinLVGA]

I am puzzled by those wanting a rookie coach from the NCAA, because of the youngsters. I think the young players would benefit by a coach with good experience in the NHL, rather than one without.

 

[MAINE-IAC]

I am puzzled by those wanting a rookie coach from the NCAA, because of the youngsters. I think the young players would benefit by a coach with good experience in the NHL, rather than one without.

Probably thinking that it worked for the Celtics . Does that mean it can work for the Bruins? Are there any examples of a ncaa coach coming directly over to the nhl with good results?

 

[Ratty]

Probably thinking that it worked for the Celtics . Does that mean it can work for the Bruins? Are there any examples of a ncaa coach coming directly over to the nhl with good results?

You have only to look at the most recent: Hakstol, formerly of ND, now running Philly. Got the team into the playoffs his first season.

 

[bp13]

The funniest part of this discussion to me is the idea of bringing in a coach to play "up-tempo hockey". It's like some of you have never looked at this roster. We would need to gut half the roster to have a team with above average speed, let alone a "fast" team.

This suggestion was like last offseason when Sweeney claimed he wanted a better transition game then he re-signed McQuaid and went to the beach for the rest of the summer. "Hey coach, turn water into wine for me. I'll be working on my tan."

If you want a real change in style or a real change in results, looking at the coach isn't the answer. It's the roster. Always has been.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

Probably thinking that it worked for the Celtics . Does that mean it can work for the Bruins? Are there any examples of a ncaa coach coming directly over to the nhl with good results?

NCAA basketball is the top development league in that "sport", so I would say it makes sense... NCAA hockey isn't, especially not ECAC or Hockey East.

 

[crimsonace]

The funniest part of this discussion to me is the idea of bringing in a coach to play "up-tempo hockey". It's like some of you have never looked at this roster. We would need to gut half the roster to have a team with above average speed, let alone a "fast" team.

This suggestion was like last offseason when Sweeney claimed he wanted a better transition game then he re-signed McQuaid and went to the beach for the rest of the summer. "Hey coach, turn water into wine for me. I'll be working on my tan."

If you want a real change in style or a real change in results, looking at the coach isn't the answer. It's the roster. Always has been.

The other part of the discussion is the B's definitely changed their approach to play uptempo hockey THIS YEAR. They were among the top teams in the NHL in scoring, despite their awful lack of finish at the end of the year. The breakout didn't often involve the endless D-to-D passes we used to see with the wings coming low for puck support (and forecheckers flying in to disrupt the play), but often a quick up from behind the net to the C with wingers heading into the neutral zone. They *tried* to play a transition game, but the lack of speed and the lack of skill on the back end didn't help.

 

[BMC]

The funniest part of this discussion to me is the idea of bringing in a coach to play "up-tempo hockey". It's like some of you have never looked at this roster. We would need to gut half the roster to have a team with above average speed, let alone a "fast" team.

This suggestion was like last offseason when Sweeney claimed he wanted a better transition game then he re-signed McQuaid and went to the beach for the rest of the summer. "Hey coach, turn water into wine for me. I'll be working on my tan."

If you want a real change in style or a real change in results, looking at the coach isn't the answer. It's the roster. Always has been.

This is my opinion too.

 

[njbruin*]

Yeah, I dunno who was bashing Q, but sounds like sour grapes. I felt he was dismissed too soon both times.

That's my point, there were many fans and media members who were bashing him and when Chicago hired him, he was viewed like a retread.

Coaches need to be in the right place with the right mix of talent to be effectively be successful. People argue that Claude fits that case , he doesn't have the right mix of talent and I'd agree. But in my opinion its easier to get another coach that fits the organizations current vision , than to retrofit this roster to fit Claudes system.

 

[njbruin*]

The funniest part of this discussion to me is the idea of bringing in a coach to play "up-tempo hockey". It's like some of you have never looked at this roster. We would need to gut half the roster to have a team with above average speed, let alone a "fast" team.

This suggestion was like last offseason when Sweeney claimed he wanted a better transition game then he re-signed McQuaid and went to the beach for the rest of the summer. "Hey coach, turn water into wine for me. I'll be working on my tan."

If you want a real change in style or a real change in results, looking at the coach isn't the answer. It's the roster. Always has been.

Sure the roster is halfway there its a hybrid. But its just as far off in terms of fitting Julien's system. Either way changes need to be made , but isn't it prudent to move toward the way the NHL is going as opposed to going back to the Julien system because it used to work in the NHL.

 

[njbruin*]

The other part of the discussion is the B's definitely changed their approach to play uptempo hockey THIS YEAR. They were among the top teams in the NHL in scoring, despite their awful lack of finish at the end of the year. The breakout didn't often involve the endless D-to-D passes we used to see with the wings coming low for puck support (and forecheckers flying in to disrupt the play), but often a quick up from behind the net to the C with wingers heading into the neutral zone. They *tried* to play a transition game, but the lack of speed and the lack of skill on the back end didn't help.

Yes for like two weeks at the beginning of the season. Claude gave it the old college try and developed rashes and quickly reverted back to his coveted system.

 

[hemispheres]

Yes for like two weeks at the beginning of the season. Claude gave it the old college try and developed rashes and quickly reverted back to his coveted system.

You talking about the same 2 weeks they went 2 and 4 and looked totally useless?

 

[Estlin]

Fresh face might be the way to go if CJ is moved, but I`m always skeptical, I recall a time when Dallas Eakins was considered to be a guy who could do wonders with kids too

I don't buy the analogy. Edmonton was, and remains, a dumpster fire. The Bruins have their problems, but the team has not sunk to the level of generalized incompetence that the Oilers have put on display for almost a decade.

 

[Fenway]

http://www.csnne.com/video/take-your-pick-who-would-make-best-coach-bruins

Chris Gasper and Gary Tanguay play a game of ‘Take Your Pick’ and give their take on who would make the best head coach for the Boston Bruins.

 

[njbruin*]

You talking about the same 2 weeks they went 2 and 4 and looked totally useless?

More like the 1st 3 or 4 games. Its not like the "transition" system was the only issue. Rask played like dog dung the 1st 4-5 games , Chara missed the 1st 3 and the team had how many new faces on the roster (Hayes, Connolly (he played what 3 games last year), Rinaldo, Beleskey, Kemp, Morrow, Irwin). Claude abandoned the attempt much too soon.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

so many posters in this thread are naming guys that either its their first job or they are 'win now' coaches.

do these fans really believe we are a win now team? or that its a good idea for a coach to take over a team on the cupse of being a playoff team and then ride out a rebuild?

we are headed into a rebuild... I cant see how anyone would imagine different. its not possible to bandaid this team now. chara might be better than most of his distractors want to believe but he clearly isn't the super stud he used to be and we would need for a turnaround anytime soon. hes also on the end of his career and will be gone before we get good again.

marchand is 1 year away from ufa... and an argument can be made that guys his size/style don't really last beyond age 32-33... then they almost always fall off the face of the earth. if we are in a rebuild for the next 3-4 years it doesn't really make sense to keep marchand and waste his prime years.

no coach is going to be able to change this the next couple years... but in the next couple years we need to keep a positive attitude while we lose games. coaches can play a large difference in keeping a positive attitude

we DONT want a coach that is fighting for his job and trying to win every meaningless game. we DONT want a coach that is benching the kids because the coach is worried about winning some meaningless game.

we need to talk to the prospective coach... lay it out... that he is a caretaker coach. that he will almost certainly be fired in a couple years. tell him that we will find a spot in the organization after but we need him to do the right thing now.

develop the kids... keep it positive and supportive.

teach the kids the winning system... how to pay attention to the details.

an adam oates type might be ok... I like what I know of rick tocchet. it really doesn't matter if these guys didn't win in their old teams cause they wont win here either. what matters is their positive attitude and how they interact with kids.

 

[chizzler]

so many posters in this thread are naming guys that either its their first job or they are 'win now' coaches.

do these fans really believe we are a win now team? or that its a good idea for a coach to take over a team on the cupse of being a playoff team and then ride out a rebuild?

we are headed into a rebuild... I cant see how anyone would imagine different. its not possible to bandaid this team now. chara might be better than most of his distractors want to believe but he clearly isn't the super stud he used to be and we would need for a turnaround anytime soon. hes also on the end of his career and will be gone before we get good again.

marchand is 1 year away from ufa... and an argument can be made that guys his size/style don't really last beyond age 32-33... then they almost always fall off the face of the earth. if we are in a rebuild for the next 3-4 years it doesn't really make sense to keep marchand and waste his prime years.

no coach is going to be able to change this the next couple years... but in the next couple years we need to keep a positive attitude while we lose games. coaches can play a large difference in keeping a positive attitude

we DONT want a coach that is fighting for his job and trying to win every meaningless game. we DONT want a coach that is benching the kids because the coach is worried about winning some meaningless game.

we need to talk to the prospective coach... lay it out... that he is a caretaker coach. that he will almost certainly be fired in a couple years. tell him that we will find a spot in the organization after but we need him to do the right thing now.

develop the kids... keep it positive and supportive.

teach the kids the winning system... how to pay attention to the details.

an adam oates type might be ok... I like what I know of rick tocchet. it really doesn't matter if these guys didn't win in their old teams cause they wont win here either. what matters is their positive attitude and how they interact with kids.

Most people aren't looking at the big picture. This team will suck for a minimum of two years before turning it around with younger players. Any coach that here will not win. What the incentive to come? Keep Clode, who is under contract and keep building. I'm not a Clode guy but seems to me it's the only way due to their position. Everyone is at fault. Now it's time to pay up.

 

[Daishi]

Most people aren't looking at the big picture. This team will suck for a minimum of two years before turning it around with younger players. Any coach that here will not win. What the incentive to come? Keep Clode, who is under contract and keep building. I'm not a Clode guy but seems to me it's the only way due to their position. Everyone is at fault. Now it's time to pay up.

I'm thinking we'll suck for at least four years, because of the roster mismanagement and Sweeney trying to 'win now' despite not having the horses. Aside from Pastrnak, all of our future core players are still in minors or juniors. Missing the playoffs for about six years in a row isn't out of the question. We need a miracle in order to get back to contention quicker. Winning the lottery would help.

 

[ODAAT]

The funniest part of this discussion to me is the idea of bringing in a coach to play "up-tempo hockey". It's like some of you have never looked at this roster. We would need to gut half the roster to have a team with above average speed, let alone a "fast" team.

This suggestion was like last offseason when Sweeney claimed he wanted a better transition game then he re-signed McQuaid and went to the beach for the rest of the summer. "Hey coach, turn water into wine for me. I'll be working on my tan."

If you want a real change in style or a real change in results, looking at the coach isn't the answer. It's the roster. Always has been.

exactly and this roster, regardless of who the coach is, couldn`t keep up with a run and gun, up tempo game, they can`t keep up to a slow one

Teams less skilled but quick expose this team let alone the good teams out there

 

[Dreghorn2]

... I like what I know of rick tocchet. QUOTE]

Well if you're a betting man, he's your guy.