Should Cronin be fired? Yay or Nay?

[JAHV]

For me, it simply comes down to this:

I think Cronin was hired for a lot of the background stuff - work ethic, practice habits, learning how to play the game the "right" way - and those things have value, particularly for young players who are the future of this team. As fans, we don't get to see the background stuff so we can't really judge how Cronin is doing on the things he's directly responsible for.

The reason those things have value is because they should lead to better play on the ice. It's foolish to expect it to happen right away or for this team to be a playoff team after a year and a half, but work ethic and practice habits are only valuable because they help players be better at NHL hockey. We should see them pass better and play better defense and score more goals and all of that. After a year and a half of Cronin's teaching, there should at least be some noticeable, incremental improvement in play from these guys. Based on measurable statistics and the eye test, it's very difficult to see how Cronin's program has made these players better.

In order to defend Cronin, you have to make one of these arguments:

1. The training program Cronin is running takes longer than a year and a half to have any noticeable effect on game performance.
2. The players ARE better, we just can't see it or measure it. I'm not really sure how this would work unless we also believe that the system Cronin is running is so bad (or so hard to master) that it negates any of the individual gains in skill/strength/intelligence the players have made over his tenure.

I'm skeptical about both of those arguments. The only argument for keeping Cronin I find at all compelling is not a defense of him, but rather an acknowledgment that firing him only makes sense if there is a ready replacement who can immediately help the team improve. This argument assumes that Cronin is not actively doing damage to the players' development, and I'm not sure if that's true. But at least that argument makes some sense.

 

[robbieboy3686]

For me, it simply comes down to this:

I think Cronin was hired for a lot of the background stuff - work ethic, practice habits, learning how to play the game the "right" way - and those things have value, particularly for young players who are the future of this team. As fans, we don't get to see the background stuff so we can't really judge how Cronin is doing on the things he's directly responsible for.

The reason those things have value is because they should lead to better play on the ice. It's foolish to expect it to happen right away or for this team to be a playoff team after a year and a half, but work ethic and practice habits are only valuable because they help players be better at NHL hockey. We should see them pass better and play better defense and score more goals and all of that. After a year and a half of Cronin's teaching, there should at least be some noticeable, incremental improvement in play from these guys. Based on measurable statistics and the eye test, it's very difficult to see how Cronin's program has made these players better.

In order to defend Cronin, you have to make one of these arguments:

1. The training program Cronin is running takes longer than a year and a half to have any noticeable effect on game performance.
2. The players ARE better, we just can't see it or measure it. I'm not really sure how this would work unless we also believe that the system Cronin is running is so bad (or so hard to master) that it negates any of the individual gains in skill/strength/intelligence the players have made over his tenure.

I'm skeptical about both of those arguments. The only argument for keeping Cronin I find at all compelling is not a defense of him, but rather an acknowledgment that firing him only makes sense if there is a ready replacement who can immediately help the team improve. This argument assumes that Cronin is not actively doing damage to the players' development, and I'm not sure if that's true. But at least that argument makes some sense.

Well written

 

[eaterfan]

For me, it simply comes down to this:

I think Cronin was hired for a lot of the background stuff - work ethic, practice habits, learning how to play the game the "right" way - and those things have value, particularly for young players who are the future of this team. As fans, we don't get to see the background stuff so we can't really judge how Cronin is doing on the things he's directly responsible for.

The reason those things have value is because they should lead to better play on the ice. It's foolish to expect it to happen right away or for this team to be a playoff team after a year and a half, but work ethic and practice habits are only valuable because they help players be better at NHL hockey. We should see them pass better and play better defense and score more goals and all of that. After a year and a half of Cronin's teaching, there should at least be some noticeable, incremental improvement in play from these guys. Based on measurable statistics and the eye test, it's very difficult to see how Cronin's program has made these players better.

In order to defend Cronin, you have to make one of these arguments:

1. The training program Cronin is running takes longer than a year and a half to have any noticeable effect on game performance.
2. The players ARE better, we just can't see it or measure it. I'm not really sure how this would work unless we also believe that the system Cronin is running is so bad (or so hard to master) that it negates any of the individual gains in skill/strength/intelligence the players have made over his tenure.

I'm skeptical about both of those arguments. The only argument for keeping Cronin I find at all compelling is not a defense of him, but rather an acknowledgment that firing him only makes sense if there is a ready replacement who can immediately help the team improve. This argument assumes that Cronin is not actively doing damage to the players' development, and I'm not sure if that's true. But at least that argument makes some sense.

Great post.

I'd add one more argument to support Cronin (I don't agree with it, but if you support Cronin this is a valid reason). The players aren't as talented as the hockey world thinks they are. You can't get blood from a stone. If that's the case there isn't really much Cronin or any coach can do and this franchise is screwed for the next half decade at least. But it would still be possible Cronin is a good coach and we won't get better results no matter who takes over. This person should believe that Verbeek should be gone.

 

[robbieboy3686]

Great post.

I'd add one more argument to support Cronin (I don't agree with it, but if you support Cronin this is a valid reason). The players aren't as talented as the hockey world thinks they are. You can't get blood from a stone. If that's the case there isn't really much Cronin or any coach can do and this franchise is screwed for the next half decade at least. But it would still be possible Cronin is a good coach and we won't get better results no matter who takes over. This person should believe that Verbeek should be gone.

Exactly this, this is why verbeek doesn’t risk bringing Cronin back next season. If he did, he would be saying “ the team is fine, our players are fine and our coach is fine “ so he then risks his neck unnecessarily because if things then kept going bad, verbeek leaves himself open to be fired next season at any given point he and Cronin together . When all he has to do, for a vote of confidence is fire Cronin and try to spend some money in free agency( it then allows him time)

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

I feel like I've never seen Silfverberg get mad on the ice... The fact that he came out with these comments is wild to me.

Makes me wonder if he would have stayed another year with a different coach.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

Surely this is the first time a coach has ever laid into his players during a game they were getting blown out in

I guess choosing yelling and trying to embarrass the team publicly is a choice over trying to figure out a different way to improve the team on the ice. You know, that thing that coaches should be doing at the NHL level. Maybe Cronin thought he was in a movie and it was his time for a motivational moment. Like Lyubushkin cited, Cronin would show 30-minute motivational videos every practice and Cronin is bringing it to real life.

But that is the culture that Verbeek wants over finding ways to improve on the ice. Cronin isn't the problem. Cronin is Verbeek's avatar on the bench. Verbeek is the problem. Sadly, I don't think ownership will fire Verbeek until the five-year mark.

 

[Deuce22]

I guess choosing yelling and trying to embarrass the team publicly is a choice over trying to figure out a different way to improve the team on the ice. You know, that thing that coaches should be doing at the NHL level. Maybe Cronin thought he was in a movie and it was his time for a motivational moment. Like Lyubushkin cited, Cronin would show 30-minute motivational videos every practice and Cronin is bringing it to real life.

But that is the culture that Verbeek wants over finding ways to improve on the ice. Cronin isn't the problem. Cronin is Verbeek's avatar on the bench. Verbeek is the problem. Sadly, I don't think ownership will fire Verbeek until the five-year mark.

All the calls for Cronin's firing miss the point. Verbeek hired him, Verbeek knows whats going on off the ice, Verbeek knew who he was when he was hired. If Verbeek thinks he's a good coach, it's Verbeek we need to be worried about. If Cronin is canned, will we get someone similar?

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

All the calls for Cronin's firing miss the point. Verbeek hired him, Verbeek knows whats going on off the ice, Verbeek knew who he was when he was hired. If Verbeek thinks he's a good coach, it's Verbeek we need to be worried about. If Cronin is canned, will we get someone similar?

Verbeek is also the one who hired McIlvane, who is the complete opposite of Cronin, and Clune was brought in as a guy who could be more relatable to the players. So probably not.

I really think Cronin was supposed to be the bad cop that instilled "hard working habits" for when the next coach came in, which isn't inherently a bad idea. It just hasn't worked out.

 

[eaterfan]

All the calls for Cronin's firing miss the point. Verbeek hired him, Verbeek knows whats going on off the ice, Verbeek knew who he was when he was hired. If Verbeek thinks he's a good coach, it's Verbeek we need to be worried about. If Cronin is canned, will we get someone similar?

Why do we assume this is the case? People never really know anyone else. They don't know how people will be when they get a new job or promotion. We see this in the NFL all the time when the hot new coordinator gets the head coaching job. The jobs are a little different and you can't account for how personalities will work. Even older guys grow and change. Dan Quinn was a bad coach with the Falcons, reflected on what went wrong and changed as the DC with Cowboys and has done great with the Commanders.

It's been a year and a half, so it should be more apparent now, but to act like this is exactly who Verbeek thought he was getting is making a lot of assumptions.

 

[JAHV]

Great post.

I'd add one more argument to support Cronin (I don't agree with it, but if you support Cronin this is a valid reason). The players aren't as talented as the hockey world thinks they are. You can't get blood from a stone. If that's the case there isn't really much Cronin or any coach can do and this franchise is screwed for the next half decade at least. But it would still be possible Cronin is a good coach and we won't get better results no matter who takes over. This person should believe that Verbeek should be gone.

This is completely valid, but I can't bring myself to believe it. Which doesn't mean it's not true, but I'm much more invested in the players than the coach. And if the players are all bad, we have no hope of being good any time in the next five years.

 

[Firequacker]

Surely this is the first time a coach has ever laid into his players during a game they were getting blown out in

So what is your actual argument here? That there's no line a coach can possibly cross where the 'motivation' becomes inappropriate or at least counterproductive? That Jakob Silfverberg, the respected veteran who reportedly answered teammate complaints with "waaah! waaah! waaah!", is a soft whiner who doesn't know where those lines are? That blatant humiliation tactics are a good way to develop young players who should be expected to make a lot of mistakes?

Or you're just knee-jerk defending everything Cronin does (again) because you've decided there's no possible way leaving him in place could hurt anything enough to be worth firing him, because after all, a bunch of teams who didn't hire Greg Cronin didn't fire their coaches? Or because you think 'humbling' the players is a Verbeek directive and any coach would've behaved exactly the same way (a way a guy who played for Carlyle seems to find a bridge too far)?

 

[MMC]

So what is your actual argument here?

That I don’t really give a f*** about this

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

Silf's comments feel like a bit of a vibe change... I think if we lose the next couple on top of this he might actually be gone

 

[Deuce22]

Verbeek is also the one who hired McIlvane, who is the complete opposite of Cronin, and Clune was brought in as a guy who could be more relatable to the players. So probably not.

I really think Cronin was supposed to be the bad cop that instilled "hard working habits" for when the next coach came in, which isn't inherently a bad idea. It just hasn't worked out.

Agree with you point that Cronin was brought in to be bad cop to counter Eakins' country club. But if I (as GM) was watching my prized draft picks and future core stagnate, I wouldn't sit back and let it happen.

Why do we assume this is the case? People never really know anyone else. They don't know how people will be when they get a new job or promotion. We see this in the NFL all the time when the hot new coordinator gets the head coaching job. The jobs are a little different and you can't account for how personalities will work. Even older guys grow and change. Dan Quinn was a bad coach with the Falcons, reflected on what went wrong and changed as the DC with Cowboys and has done great with the Commanders.

It's been a year and a half, so it should be more apparent now, but to act like this is exactly who Verbeek thought he was getting is making a lot of assumptions.

I am really worried about Verbeek if he's hiring a coach and doesn't know what he is about. That screams incompetence to me.

 

[Mr Rogers]

It's a little funny how there are players who have been critical of Cronin while Knoll and Cavanagh have sort of been subtly defensive of him. Not a big deal but i find it a bit amusing. I think i mentioned once that the media guys in the market have a strong incentive to not be critical of the coach but i got some pushback here.

Derek Lee and Patrick Present were kind of critical of Cronin and the team in general i felt in their latest podcast. Those two are probably the best to get a level-headed opinion from. They are a lot more informed than Sicard/Rudolph but don't give me a 'company man' vibe like Knoll and to a lesser extent, Cavanagh. Knoll might as well just be a writer for the team website, there would be no difference.

 

[eaterfan]

Agree with you point that Cronin was brought in to be bad cop to counter Eakins' country club. But if I (as GM) was watching my prized draft picks and future core stagnate, I wouldn't sit back and let it happen.


I am really worried about Verbeek if he's hiring a coach and doesn't know what he is about. That screams incompetence to me.

Knowing what someone is about and the exact degree they are a hardass are very different things. Knowing if someone will be pushing things just up to the line or maybe cross the line is not incompetence. There are plenty of disciplinarian types that work in the NHL. There are plenty who don't. It's how the message is delivered and how it's received. You can't know if it works for a coach or the players in advance with 100% accuracy, and it's even harder to know when it's a first time coach.

 

[Static]

I take what silf says seriously and he's never come off as frivolous with his opinions. Sucks to read that.

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

Agree with you point that Cronin was brought in to be bad cop to counter Eakins' country club. But if I (as GM) was watching my prized draft picks and future core stagnate, I wouldn't sit back and let it happen.


I am really worried about Verbeek if he's hiring a coach and doesn't know what he is about. That screams incompetence to me.

I think we're only just barely entering the "stagnate" territory. Players are going to have slumps and you have to let them (and the coaches try to help them) work through it. One bad year (Cronin's first year) isn't a major concern. Then there were signs of improvement during this season so I think that bought Cronin some grace. But now it's looking like that improvement was a mirage.

As a subjective fan that's watching every game I want Cronin gone ASAP but I think a more objective, patient third party wouldn't fault Verbeek for giving him a second chance.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

I take what silf says seriously and he's never come off as frivolous with his opinions. Sucks to read that.

I agree. And for those who want to blow it off as a one off, I'm quite sure Silf would not have said anything if it were merely a one off and not a representation of the overall picture of how things at least were when he was there. When a guy with his pedigree says something people should listen.

 

[Firequacker]

It's a little funny how there are players who have been critical of Cronin while Knoll and Cavanagh have sort of been subtly defensive of him. Not a big deal but i find it a bit amusing. I think i mentioned once that the media guys in the market have a strong incentive to not be critical of the coach but i got some pushback here.

Derek Lee and Patrick Present were kind of critical of Cronin and the team in general i felt in their latest podcast. Those two are probably the best to get a level-headed opinion from. They are a lot more informed than Sicard/Rudolph but don't give me a 'company man' vibe like Knoll and to a lesser extent, Cavanagh. Knoll might as well just be a writer for the team website, there would be no difference.

Generally agree with all this, though to give credit where it's due, Cavanagh has really improved over the course of the season (both in general coverage and in coming across as a little more critical at times. He was clearly not impressed by yesterday's practice lines, among other things.) Hopefully he keeps improving, the more the merrier and all.

 

[Kalv]

I wonder why those UFAs don't want to come here

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

I wonder why those UFAs don't want to come here

Doesn’t matter. It’s impossible to tell whether what’s happening with the team is good or bad before an arbitrary number of years that I made up, so literally nothing that is said, done, or observed can change my mind.

And because I "don’t give a f***" about this, I’m going to constantly post about it. You know, like a f***ing troll.

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

I feel like this thread needs to be merged with the coaching thread.

I am spreading my zingers too thin here

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I think we're only just barely entering the "stagnate" territory. Players are going to have slumps and you have to let them (and the coaches try to help them) work through it. One bad year (Cronin's first year) isn't a major concern. Then there were signs of improvement during this season so I think that bought Cronin some grace. But now it's looking like that improvement was a mirage.

As a subjective fan that's watching every game I want Cronin gone ASAP but I think a more objective, patient third party wouldn't fault Verbeek for giving him a second chance.

The problem with your take is that Verbeek didn't see last year as a bad year. Thus, this year is the similar to last year except that we have better goaltending this season. I don't think Verbeek sees Cronin in a negative light at all to want to fire Cronin mid-season.

Zegras is in a two-year slump since Cronin became head coach.

Of course, outside factors might get to Verbeek or ownership such as hearing "Fire Cronin!" in the background of the post-game show being broadcasted to all of southern cal and Hawai'i. Or the amount of Cronin criticisms that keep piling up through publications with Lyubushkin's interview, Cronin admitting he went too hard on LaCombe to cause LaCombe to seek help, and now Silf's interview could not only increase the need to fire Cronin sooner, but Verbeek as well for allowing it.

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

The problem with your take is that Verbeek didn't see last year as a bad year. Thus, this year is the similar to last year except that we have better goaltending this season. I don't think Verbeek sees Cronin in a negative light at all to want to fire Cronin mid-season.

Zegras is in a two-year slump since Cronin became head coach.

Of course, outside factors might get to Verbeek or ownership such as hearing "Fire Cronin!" in the background of the post-game show being broadcasted to all of southern cal and Hawai'i. Or the amount of Cronin criticisms that keep piling up through publications with Lyubushkin's interview, Cronin admitting he went too hard on LaCombe to cause LaCombe to seek help, and now Silf's interview could not only increase the need to fire Cronin sooner, but Verbeek as well for allowing it.

I don't think we can truly know how Verbeek thinks/thought about last year. Clearly he wasn't totally thrilled with Cronin because he had to tell Cronin to dial it back.

That said, Zegras is the worst example to use to point out Cronin's failures... Zegras has missed over 70 games in the last two seasons. Even if Cronin was a great coach, there's hardly been enough time to assess Z's progress or lack thereof.