Hockey GMs get fired all the time for hiring North American coaches.
You really think Holland doesn't hire a European guys because he is scared of getting fired in Detroit?
Keikolainen or however you spell his name thinks hiring Tortarella and giving up a 2nd round pick is a safer move than hiring a European coach?
You're really not understanding the concept. It's that they have disincentive to radically experiment by breaking from conventional wisdom because the consequences of failure are greater than the consequences of success (relative to the consequences of the alternative, safe choice).
And Holland, or any GM with sufficient job security, is the perfect candidate to experiment radically. To extend the earlier analogy of NFL teams being risk averse in the case of punting on fourth down, it's actually been shown that coaches with established tenures and job security are actually much less risk averse here. Same concept applies here, so you're right, if someone is going to experiment, it's likely to be a manager like Holland who has plenty of job security.
IF that is the case why bring in European players then? Why not go with the risk adverse Canadian guys and keep your job forever?
This is a red herring. But you can refer to the earlier post by WhiskeyYourTheDevils for the answer to this question.
In any event, it is the height of arrogance to claim that no NHL-caliber European coach exists. You have no basis for that comment.
There's really no reason to believe the 30 coaches in the NHL are the 30 best coaches in the world. I'd argue there is
plenty of reason to believe otherwise, though.
Good call. Didn't last long though.
