Other than the nebulous "outcoached" critique (which, to me, seems to often mean "we lost, I'm angry, and I want someone to blame without having to think too hard"), the most common knock against Maurice seems to be roster/line-up decisions. With modern analytics (which are a good thing!), in which players can so easily be summarized by a few stats numbers, it's easy to back this kind of critique. Look, my favorite player has a better XYZ% than this pylon Maurice is playing! He sucks!
While we should of course consider the analytics, there's a lot of valid reasons to play a statistically inferior player in any given game, or sometimes even for a season:
- The statistically better player is injured
- The statistically better player is in a slump (these are real things, and don't show up in many statistical models which summarize over large stretches of gameplay)
- The statistically worse player has some potential that the coach sees, believes in, and wants to give NHL experience. He believes this will be better for the team in the long run. Example: Tanev
- The statistically better player still has some flaws that would be better served by playing in the AHL.
- The statistically worse player is actually better at whatever 5v5 role (e.g. shutdown line) that the coach is trying to fill.
- The statistically worse player is actually better at whatever special teams role that the coach wants to use him on.
- (controversial, but I believe to be true) The statistically worse player has an important leadership role, such as instilling a strong work ethic, particularly among the younger players of the team. This makes the team better.
- The statistically worse player is a vet with a better grasp on implementing and playing the coach's system, which helps the overall team more quickly and successfully adapt to the new system.
- More generally, having too much young talent on the team at once can cause issues and disruption in systems/attitude/work ethic.
- The statistically worse player matches up better in the particular scenario for the game/team/line that the coach is matching against.
I'm certainly not saying the coach is always right. And I'm not saying we as fans shouldn't critique roster decisions. But I think folks are often too quick to assume the coach is an idiot, doesn't understand talent, doesn't understand stats, and has some primitive vet bias or something. I usually take the opposite approach. I assume the coach understands everything we fans do (it seems crazy to think otherwise). I instead try to figure out why the coach made an unexpected roster decision. There's always a reason, and it might be a good one.