League News: NHL Talk - (News n' Scores n' Stuff) | 2024-25 Summer Edition

[BobRouse]

James Dolan is the Man!!! Love that guy!

Up there with Dan Snyder and Woody Johnson as impact sports owners of all time.

Read Mercagliano’s article and did t realize how important Sather was to them in terms of keeping Dolan impulses at bay.

Sorry Rongo fans

 

[hb13xchamps]

Merry Christmas……you’re fired. Absolute brutal timing for a team that has been dogshit for the majority of the year. Seems a little too late.

Also we’ve seen how many guys get chances now who have had success from AHL/CHL/NCAA gigs. Bruce and Carbs immediately from our system. Plus Jared Bednar, Jon Cooper, Knoblauch last year, Jim Montgomery etc.

Then you have long time assistants like Evanson and Berube get their chances. There’s definitely success stories for sure

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

Yeah that’s lazy reasoning IMO…but hey….I’m open to proof that that’s how the interview/selection process works.

And just being knowledgeable about a sport, playing a sport at a high level doesn’t qualify you to lead a team as a successful HC….ask #99.

Lazy or realistic? Is it more realistic to think an entire generation of coaches don’t know the game well enough and can’t interview well enough to get an NHL HC job or that older, entrenched GMs prefer to hire the older, entrenched guys they came up with?

I grant you there’s certainly a level of experience that experienced hires bring but those retreads were once first time head coaches too.

What’s the last example of a retread coach actually working out? Paul Maurice is the obvious answer but besides him. Trotz for a bit in New York? Mike Sullivan was a first time HC. So was Jon Cooper. Ryan Suska, Jim Hiller, and obviously Carbs have the Flames, Kings, and Caps playing way better than anyone gave them credit for. Sheldon Keefe broke the first round curse for the Leafs. Kris Knobloch came in as a first time head coach and had the Oilers within a game of winning the Cup.

Every situation is different and both new and old coaches will and won’t work out for various reasons but I don’t agree with the assertion that younger coaches aren’t getting opportunities because they’re lesser qualified or bad interviewers, there’s too strong a track record of recent first-time coaches having significant success for that to be the reason.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Lazy or realistic? Is it more realistic to think an entire generation of coaches don’t know the game well enough and can’t interview well enough to get an NHL HC job or that older, entrenched GMs prefer to hire the older, entrenched guys they came up with?

I grant you there’s certainly a level of experience that experienced hires bring but those retreads were once first time head coaches too.

What’s the last example of a retread coach actually working out? Paul Maurice is the obvious answer but besides him. Trotz for a bit in New York? Mike Sullivan was a first time HC. So was Jon Cooper. Ryan Suska, Jim Hiller, and obviously Carbs have the Flames, Kings, and Caps playing way better than anyone gave them credit for. Sheldon Keefe broke the first round curse for the Leafs. Kris Knobloch came in as a first time head coach and had the Oilers within a game of winning the Cup.

Every situation is different and both new and old coaches will and won’t work out for various reasons but I don’t agree with the assertion that younger coaches aren’t getting opportunities because they’re lesser qualified or bad interviewers, there’s too strong a track record of recent first-time coaches having significant success for that to be the reason.

Sullivan retread (was the Bruins HC long before Pens)…hired by Pitt and won immediately.

Laviolette HC at NYI, hired by Carolina won year 2.

Cassidy HC at Bos, hired by Vegas won immediately.

Sutter retread, hired by LA, won immediately.

Trotz, retread, won year 4.

Julien retread, won year 4.

Quenneville retread, won year 2.

Maurice, retread, won year 2.


Cooper first won in his 8th season, Bednar his 6th.

This covers all the Cups back to 2006…

Seeing a pattern?

(Edited for spelling and accuracy)

 

[Ridley Simon]

Yeah… no. It’s because nobody got fired for hiring IBM but they did get fired for hiring the unknown startup. Even if IBM f***ed the job up they could say they did their diligence and went with the safest pick with the longest track record.

You mean to tell me you actually think that somehow there’s a 20-year gap where coaches in their 20s, 30s, and early 40s who played and coached the game in the modern era are less knowledgeable about the sport than guys who played in the 70s and 80s and all interview poorer than the old retreads?

I know you like taking the contrarian view on things but sometimes it’s really just Occam’s Razor. The most likely scenario is the old GMs continue to hire names they’re familiar with and think somehow it’ll work out better for them.

NHL GMs hiring new coaches is essentially just this scene on repeat.

Well — we did win our only Cup, with a recycled coach.

So there is that.

Edit — and yes I am a tad bit late to this party

 

[twabby]

Coaches should have zero playing experience IMO.

New GM hires shouldn't even know what hockey is.

 

[kicksavedave]

Well — we did win our only Cup, with a recycled coach.

So there is that.

Edit — and yes I am a tad bit late to this party

I mean, we won with a recycled coach, but apart from Barry we went through a ton of first time NHL coaches with varying degrees of success. Cassidy, Hanlon never did much. Gabby won in the RS but not in the playoffs. Hunter and Oates didn't really work out, then Trotz finally broke through, but then Rierden stunk. Carbs would be breaking a trend if he can deliver the ultimate goal... even if he can't, he's clearly a great coach who is pulling all the right strings.

I think its fair to say the NHL loves to recycle coaches, but the reason for that is probably a lot more varied than just one answer. But in general, @twabby answer is the right one, NHL GMs aren't always very good.

 

[Empty Goal Net]

Expansion has meant that fringe players and coaches continue to get consideration and a spot on a roster or behind the bench. Sometimes a 'safe' choice works, sometimes not. Age/experience by themselves are not necessarily disqualifying criteria, but often seem to be overrated by those making the decisions. Napkin guy was hired out of the minors, and finally won a cup a couple of decades later.

 

[Ridley Simon]

I’ve said it before. I will say it again. Ted and Dick (George?) made some crap hires for HC’s.

Like bad, really bad. The lucked into Gabby, as he was NOT some “master stroke”, but just a guy that wanted to move up. Career coach and all.

GMBM got Trotz
Then Reirden
Then Laviolette
Now Carbs

GMBM has made 75% the correct hires, at the correct times.

 

[usiel]

I’ve said it before. I will say it again. Ted and Dick (George?) made some crap hires for HC’s.

Like bad, really bad. The lucked into Gabby, as he was NOT some “master stroke”, but just a guy that wanted to move up. Career coach and all.

GMBM got Trotz
Then Reirden
Then Laviolette
Now Carbs

GMBM has made 75% the correct hires, at the correct times.

Always, always hindsight 20/20 but man was Reirden a mistake with still some peak years from a stanley cup winning team. Covid years even now seem inexplicable the Caps couldn't jell. Lavi seemed like it was a good pick but somewhere in the caps management they didn't have a feel for the existing culture to take the team where it needed to go.

 

[qc14]

Always, always hindsight 20/20 but man was Reirden a mistake with still some peak years from a stanley cup winning team. Covid years even now seem inexplicable the Caps couldn't jell. Lavi seemed like it was a good pick but somewhere in the caps management they didn't have a feel for the existing culture to take the team where it needed to go.

Yea obviously Reirden and Lavi didn't work out to varying degrees but both were still the right hires at the time. Reirden basically was thought of in a lot of the same ways Carbery was last summer before he was hired and almost certainly would've been hired by another team that as HC if the Caps didn't.

Re: retreads vs. new hires

I think a lot of people really overrate the amount of retreads there are in the league (or I guess underrate the amount of first timers). By my count going into the season exactly half of the league's teams had guys that were in their first non-interim job behind the bench. That seems like if anything a fairly progressive split!

I also find it pretty interesting how the discourse around re-hired coaches makes it seem like they can never improve, or change their style, or learn from past mistakes. No one ever thinks the same of players (especially younger ones that have high pedigrees at previous levels!).

 

[BobRouse]

Always, always hindsight 20/20 but man was Reirden a mistake with still some peak years from a stanley cup winning team. Covid years even now seem inexplicable the Caps couldn't jell. Lavi seemed like it was a good pick but somewhere in the caps management they didn't have a feel for the existing culture to take the team where it needed to go.

Never easy when the “good cop” assistant coach suddenly has to be the disciplinarian. BMac admitted as much afterward. Tough spot for Reirden.

Coaches like Keenan, Babcock, Bowman, Hunter and Lavi are on the way out as dinosaurs as the modern athelete works best with a good communicator

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

Sullivan retread (was the Bruins HC long before Pens)…hired by Pitt and won immediately.

Laviolette HC at NYI, hired by Carolina won year 2.

Cassidy HC at Bos, hired by Vegas won immediately.

Sutter retread, hired by LA, won immediately.

Trotz, retread, won year 4.

Julien retread, won year 4.

Quenneville retread, won year 2.

Maurice, retread, won year 2.


Cooper first won in his 8th season, Bednar his 6th.

This covers all the Cups back to 2006…

Seeing a pattern?

(Edited for spelling and accuracy)

There's a lot to unpack here but the pattern appears to be there is no pattern and that coaches work out or not for many reasons. Half of the coaches who won the last decade's worth of Stanley Cups are new guys, and half had coached before. As was the original point, there's no evidence at all to suggest that younger coaches don't interview well or know the game well enough. If you want to say that teams prefer NHL HC jobs not to be training grounds and that they want someone more established who has experience doing this elsewhere then I can agree with that.

 

[qc14]

There's a lot to unpack here but the pattern appears to be there is no pattern and that coaches work out or not for many reasons. Half of the coaches who won the last decade's worth of Stanley Cups are new guys, and half had coached before. As was the original point, there's no evidence at all to suggest that younger coaches don't interview well or know the game well enough. If you want to say that teams prefer NHL HC jobs not to be training grounds and that they want someone more established who has experience doing this elsewhere then I can agree with that.

I'm not sure this is actually the case. Exactly half of the coaches coming into this season were on their first non-interim NHL job

In other news, the Blackwood deal is not a good sign for an LT extension

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

I'm not sure this is actually the case. Exactly half of the coaches coming into this season were on their first non-interim NHL job

In other news, the Blackwood deal is not a good sign for an LT extension

Man, that sucks, although could essentially just give Mangiapane's money to LT and call it a day. LT has been effusive in his praise towards the Caps so maybe they can get him for a reasonable amount. I'll move my further comments to the roster building thread.

 

[trick9]

Holy overpayment for Blackwood.

Bad news re: Thompson. I guess the Caps are in decent situation though because they already have another option so they aren't as desperate as team like Avs. I'm not sure if i'd give LT 5 years right now.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

There's a lot to unpack here but the pattern appears to be there is no pattern and that coaches work out or not for many reasons. Half of the coaches who won the last decade's worth of Stanley Cups are new guys, and half had coached before. As was the original point, there's no evidence at all to suggest that younger coaches don't interview well or know the game well enough. If you want to say that teams prefer NHL HC jobs not to be training grounds and that they want someone more established who has experience doing this elsewhere then I can agree with that.

The very clear pattern is that veteran coaches have won Cups a lot more often, and a lot quicker, and not infrequently…immediately after hire.

The why could be many reasons, but I suspect it’s heavily rooted in the experience of leading men, having learned what to do and what not to do, how to get the best out of a team and individuals, etc…

If you can’t get a Carbs, or a Cooper or a Bednar, it’s easy to see why an owner who thinks their roster can compete hires a veteran coach. They tend to get results. So yes, be a fantastic communicator like the 3 I mentioned above, AND a great young coach, or you’re sinking in the interview phase and probably losing out to a veteran candidate who already has an established resume.

 

[usiel]

Never easy when the “good cop” assistant coach suddenly has to be the disciplinarian. BMac admitted as much afterward. Tough spot for Reirden.

Coaches like Keenan, Babcock, Bowman, Hunter and Lavi are on the way out as dinosaurs as the modern athelete works best with a good communicator

Ahh good pull.

 

[g00n]

There could also be selection bias at play, in that teams with a good veteran roster ready to take the next step hire veteran coaches more often.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

There could also be selection bias at play, in that teams with a good veteran roster ready to take the next step hire veteran coaches more often.

That’s what I said….easy see why an owner would hire a retread….they win Cups.

 

[g00n]

That’s what I said….easy see why an owner would hire a retread….they win Cups.

The logic is circular if they rarely give new coaches a chance with that kind of lineup, thought. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy because "retreads" get the best chances.

I'm speculating.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

The logic is circular if they rarely give new coaches a chance with that kind of lineup, thought. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy because "retreads" get the best chances.

I'm speculating.

Why would you give a rookie coach a Cup challenger? I mean as an owner….show me how that’s good business…..unless you find a young star HC in the making…It’s not.

My quick 5 second search shows about 2-4 new HC most seasons….I only quickly searched to 2006, so don’t hold me to complete accuracy. So they’re getting jobs, just not winning Cups too often before 6 (Bednar) or 8 (Cooper) seasons in.

 

[g00n]

Why would you give a rookie coach a Cup challenger? I mean as an owner….show me how that’s good business…..unless you find a young star HC in the making…It’s not.

I'm not addressing that question because it's not part of my point. I'm noting that the "retread" record might be a product of the GM thinking rather than vice versa.

I think the risk aversion explanation from the start of this topic is the most likely answer.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I'm not addressing that question because it's not part of my point. I'm noting that the "retread" record might be a product of the GM thinking rather than vice versa.

I think the risk aversion explanation from the start of this topic is the most likely answer.

That’s damn high on the list typically in critical business decisions, so yeah…it’s part of the factors to be weighed.

Owner/GM:

“Is this guy a Cooper? No, then I’ll go with a more proven guy. I don’t have 5 plus years to wait for this guy to learn to take my team to a Championship. Their prime is now, or the next 2 seasons….”…..

 

[MW6]

I also think that taking over a club midseason requires a little more experience to handle. And as a GM I would assume you want some more stability instead of going out on a limb with an already messy situation.