CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,516
- 26,497
Waddell giving Hartley a 2nd chance lol. Pretty sure they were together in Atlanta until Waddell fired him.My friend predicts it will be Bob Hartley. I don’t know if he saw it somewhere else or really came up with it on his own.
Personally after the Babcock debacle I’m not sure the team has enough goodwill to bring Hartley in. He has a reputation as a real prick.Waddell giving Hartley a 2nd chance lol. Pretty sure they were together in Atlanta until Waddell fired him.
Believe he was Chinakhov’s coach in the KHLHartley has a history with a current Jackets player?
Believe he was Chinakhov’s coach in the KHL
He also coached Johnny Hockey for 2 years.And he was correct that Chinakhov wasn't NHL ready enough.
The important thing is that he has experience with Russian hockey, he knows players' mentality. He not only won the Gagarin Cup, but also Avangard played in the finals under him.Believe he was Chinakhov’s coach in the KHL
Hartley has a history with a current Jackets player?
He was also coach of the Latvian National Team.Believe he was Chinakhov’s coach in the KHL
this was the entire justification for going with babcock and it blew up in their faces. it's also a misnomer as being a prick isn't the only way to hold players accountable.This team needs a prick as a coach after the last couple years of no accountability. Hartley has an unimpressive résumé but this would be the direction to go in.
counterpoint:The longer the GM/PHOPs search goes, the more likely I think it is Vincent stays. It's typically harder to find a new coach the later you go, Bednar/Colorado excepted of course.
i think a new battery of decision-makers in those position makes more sense than keeping the guy who lost over 70% of his games last year and wasn't the top choice in either of the last two coaching searches.I don't know that this team can handle a new GM, potentially new PHOPs, and a new head coach all together. Vincent's last year on his deal feels like a "show me" year, but what do I know.
the easy rationale for replacing both of them is simply that a new HC shouldn't be shackled to the previous regime's assistants, even if mccarthy generally did okay.I would, however, like to see Steve McCarthy replaced. And given the putrid PP, I'm indifferent about Recchi.
It also rarely goes well for upper management/ownership to tell a head coach to fire assistants so new ones, albeit ideally better ones, can be hired. So, while there seems to be mixed feelings here about Pascal, there doesn't seem to be about the work of his assistants. And (usually) the most straightforward way to get new assistants is to get a new head coach.the easy rationale for replacing both of them is simply that a new HC shouldn't be shackled to the previous regime's assistants, even if mccarthy generally did okay.
None of this, except the overall power play, but even that has stayed bad after they have changed coaches, may have anything to do with coaching. Laine's issues are much bigger than the coaching, for all we know, Gaudreau just had an off year, and who knows whose idea it was to bring Johnson back after only 10 games in the AHL.what they got instead were career-worst seasons from gaudreau and laine, regression from KJ and a league-worst power play.
the "X wasn't his fault" stuff isn't a strong enough justification to keep a guy when the results were as bad as they are and there are clear better options out there.None of this, except the overall power play, but even that has stayed bad after they have changed coaches, may have anything to do with coaching. Laine's issues are much bigger than the coaching, for all we know, Gaudreau just had an off year, and who knows whose idea it was to bring Johnson back after only 10 games in the AHL.
I am not trying to justify him staying, he wasn't the guy when they hired him, and he isn't the guy now.the "X wasn't his fault" stuff isn't a strong enough justification to keep a guy when the results were as bad as they are and there are clear better options out there.
there were a lot of things last year that weren't pascal vincent's fault, but he still performed worse than desired even after factoring those things in. same with recchi – whatever actual work he did didn't provide enough value to overlook failures that weren't entirely his fault.
good coaches adapt to challenges and put their players in a position to succeed. even considering extenuating circumstances, vincent and recchi didn't do that.
what i didn't expect was for them to more or less stay the same (last place in points and goal differential in the east and a +7 improvement in points) despite having relatively better injury luck and a stronger roster overall (added fantilli, voronkov, severson, provorov).I don't know what you were expecting from last year's team, but they weren't going to all of a sudden be world beaters with an experienced coach.
the improvement they did show (read: marginal) is ultimately meaningless given how low the previous team set the bar.You can blame what you want on Vincent, and I am not saying he is this great coach or anything, but last year's team showed a little improvement, and given the BS before the season started, I think Vincent did the best he could.