Therrien - New Season Edition

[Mr Jackpot]

2014-15 should read as follows:

This is the same 14-15 season that Subban was a Norris candidate and Pacio was a rocket richard candidate while finishing 1st in the league in +/-

And Price when he won the Ted Lindsay trophy said: "Obvsiouly I would like to thank my teammates, I couldn't do this without you guys"

Yes Price is one the 5 best players in the league and had a phenomenal year, but his success came in part because hockey is a team's play. I can't even count all the times Price thanked his teammates after game interviews in 14-15.

Look at your two gamebreakers, Crosby and Malkin, what have they done in the last 6 years? You still didn't answer that question. Hockey is a team's play.

 

[OnTheRun]

The only way, we as fans, can judge if a coach is good or not, is by looking
at his record over a decent sample size (at least 6-7 years). There's no other
way we can judge if he's good or not because we're not qualified.

Go ahead and explain why you think team's record is the best way to evaluate coaches' competences?

Is putting the 3 best coaches in the NHL behind the Coyotes bench will make them successful?

How much of the record is directly attributable to the coach's abilities?

If the team/player are not that good, as you said earlier, how does Michel Therrien manage to make them win? Sheer force of will?

 

[Mr Jackpot]

Go ahead and explain why you think team's record is the best way to evaluate coaches' competences?

I didn't say best way, I said the only way.

The only way for fans to judge if a coach is good or not, is by looking
at his record over a decent sample size.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Ok seriously I won't waste my time with this because it's ridiculous reading things like "eventual cup winning team"

There's no team in history that can win the Cup with Plekanec and Desharnais as their first two centers...

I agree.

So why did we make Desharnais our first center when we had much better options available? That's a COACHING decision.

The only way, we as fans, can judge if a coach is good or not, is by looking
at his record over a decent sample size (at least 6-7 years). There's no other way we can judge if he's good or not because we're not qualified.

So we have to be NHL coaches to know if he's doing a good job? Does that mean we have to be NHL players to know that Gretzky was better than McSorely too? What "qualifies" us to know if he's a good coach exactly?

Your argument doesn't make any sense.

You don't have to be an expert in hockey to see we didn't play well. And by any objective statistical measure we played poorly enough over the past two seasons to miss the playoffs. Outstanding goaltending got us to the postseason and without it we'd be on year three trying to get in.

That doesn't make the coach "good" in my opinion.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

when we had much better options available?

I will say this again: you overate this team's ability.

You think that there is a much better option than DD because you overate our players.

Galchenyuk is not there yet, it's pretty obvious when you saw him play last season. Will he get there this season? We hope.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I will say this again: you overate this team's ability.

You think that there is a much better option than DD because you overate our players.

Galchenyuk and Eller were both better options.

The way we deployed DD made no sense whatsoever. Neither did the dump and chase or the grinding style in the offensive zone that we deployed. And it showed up in the stats. Fortunately we had Price to bail us out.

The good news is that we've got a great lineup this season and we can start over. Hopefully MT smartens up and we move away from the dump and chase. If we do, we'll be in great shape.

 

[OnTheRun]

I didn't say best way, I said the only way.

The only way for fans to judge if a coach is good or not, is by looking
at his record over a decent sample size.

I don't have ADHD, stop shifting the goalpost and answer the questions.

If you want to define how fans "are allowed to judge coaching because they know jack****" then you have some explaining to do.

 

[ECWHSWI]

I don't have ADHD, stop shifting the goalpost and answer the questions.

If you want to define how fans "are allowed to judge coaching because they know jack****" then you have some explaining to do.

easy : we're not qualified enough to criticise the coach, but he's qualified enough to defend him

 

[Mr Jackpot]

"we had Price to bail us out" I love when Therrien haters use this argument. And they think they have solved everything about hockey when using this argument.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

"we had Price to bail us out" I love when Therrien haters use this argument. And they think they have solved everything about hockey when using this argument.

With even above average goaltending this team misses the playoffs. I'm not sure how you could ignore this. There's a reason he won every award under the sun last year.

We shouldn't need that kind of goaltending to make the postseason but that's what we've required over the past couple of years. 30 games where scored a goal or less in regulation man. That's ridiculous.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

stop shifting the goalpost and answer the questions.

your 4 questions are so ridiculous but I will answer anyway:

Go ahead and explain why you think team's record is the best way to evaluate coaches' competences?

Because to evaluate a coache's competences, you need this:

-following the team (knowing what's happening within the team)
-knowing the players
-knowing what coaching a hockey team is
-and so many other factors that fans doesn't have at their disposals.

Is putting the 3 best coaches in the NHL behind the Coyotes bench will make them successful?

No coach can make the Coyotes make the playoffs, their roster are too poor.

How much of the record is directly attributable to the coach's abilities?

A lot of the record is attributable to the coaching staff abilities, and we've seen so many exemples over the years. Look at Bob Hartley success over many years, many differents leagues, many different teams. Not just Hartley, there's a lot more coaches that had success over different teams or/and leagues or/and eras like Scotty Bowman

If the team/player are not that good, as you said earlier, how does Michel Therrien manage to make them win? Sheer force of will?

There's no sheer force of will, there's teaching, there's managing, there's planning, ect, etc and we as fans have no clue what's happening behind closed doors, we don't know what the coaching staff are doing.

And the sick thing is even if we knew what would be happening, we wouldn't know if it's good or bad because we're not qualified.

The only way we can judge, is by looking at the record.

 

[OnTheRun]

your 4 questions are so ridiculous but I will answer anyway:

Go ahead and explain why you think team's record is the best way to evaluate coaches' competences?

Because to evaluate a coache's competences, you need this:

-following the team (knowing what's happening within the team)
-knowing the players
-knowing what coaching a hockey team is
-and so many other factors that fans doesn't have at their disposals.

According to your criteria, one need to study in journalism to evaluate hockey coaching.

Is putting the 3 best coaches in the NHL behind the Coyotes bench will make them successful?

No coach can make the Coyotes make the playoffs, their roster are too poor.

Aight, then why do you give credit to Therrien for "turning thing around" in 2012-2013? 15th to 2nd! Such greatness!

And yet, the 3 best coaches in the league together could not pull that off according to you?

How much of the record is directly attributable to the coach's abilities?

A lot of the record is attributable to the coaching staff abilities, and we've seen so many exemples over the years. Look at Bob Hartley success over many years, many differents leagues, many different teams. Not just Hartley, there's a lot more coaches that had success over different teams or/and leagues or/and eras like Scotty Bowman

So the 3 best coaches of the NHL can't do anything for the Yotes, but A LOT of the record is attributable to the coaching staff abilities, doesn't make sense but gotcha.

If the team/player are not that good, as you said earlier, how does Michel Therrien manage to make them win? Sheer force of will?

There's no sheer force of will, there's teaching, there's managing, there's planning, ect, etc and we as fans have no clue what's happening behind closed doors, we don't know what the coaching staff are doing.

And the sick thing is even if we knew what would be happening, we wouldn't know if it's good or bad because we're not qualified.

The only way we can judge, is by looking at the record.

First of all, if you are not qualified to evaluate coach what make you qualified to decide how an entire fanbase should evaluate coach?

You don't need to be "behind closed doors" to evaluate "managing" and "planning" games are not played behind closed doors, just watch the games! And stats are public btw.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The only way we can judge, is by looking at the record.

This argument is intellectually lazy. There are many ways to evaluate a coach apart from the record.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

According to your criteria, one need to study in journalism to evaluate hockey coaching.

no because journalists like fans don't follow the team and don't know the players.

Aight, then why do you give credit to Therrien for "turning thing around" in 2012-2013? 15th to 2nd! Such greatness!

And yet, the 3 best coaches in league together could not pull that off according to you?

We're talking about the Habs roster vs the Coyotes roster, we're not talking about standings.

So the 3 best coaches of the NHL can't do anything for the Yotes, but A LOT of the record is attributable to the coaching staff abilities, doesn't make sense but gotcha.

A lot doesn't mean 100% or 75% of the team's success, a lot means that the coaching staff has a big part of the team success.

First of all, if you are not qualified to evaluate coach what make you qualified to decide how an entire fanbase should evaluate coach?

You don't need to be "behind closed doors" to evaluate "managing" and "planning" games are not played behind closed doors, just watch the games! And stats are public btw.

You can evaluate coache's all you want, that's what fans do.

And by watching the games, I can tell you that Galchenyuk is not there yet.

And by watching games, not the just Habs games, I can tell you that the biggest problem that Habs fans have is that they overate their team.

When you start being objective and start realizing that the Habs are average compared to other teams in the league, this is the day you will stop blaming the coaching staff.

this

 

[Mr Jackpot]

Fans think that following a team is reading hfboards and tsn.ca and listening to team 690

 

[Nynja*]

The only way we can judge, is by looking at the record.

0-3 in the first 3 games last year against Tampa in the playoffs. That record?

 

[JLP]

midpoint vs leaf and dd leads all habs forwards in toi

 

[OnTheRun]

no because journalists like fans don't follow the team and don't know the players.

Journalists follow the team around
Journalists know the players and have access to them
Journalists know the coaching staff and have access to it
Journalists have access to the "closed doors" and practice

So according to you, journalism is perfect to evaluate coaching.

We're talking about the Habs roster vs the Coyotes roster, we're not talking about standings.

Uh? So now the roster will determine the record? If so why are you using it to evaluate coaching?

You clearly used the 15th in the East to 2nd in east to pump Therrien's tires ealier

A lot doesn't mean 100% or 75% of the team's success, a lot means that the coaching staff has a big part of the team success.

For something as absolute as "the only way to evaluate coaching" you seems to be very confused by it.

One second coaches contribute to a large amount on the record, then the next it's the roster.

The top3 coaches togheter should be able to get a good record with a bad team like the Yotes, since coaches have a large amount of influence on the record and the record is the only way to evaluate coaching.

You can evaluate coache's all you want, that's what fans do.

And by watching the games, I can tell you that Galchenyuk is not there yet.

And by watching games, not the just Habs games, I can tell you that the biggest problem that Habs fans have is that they overate their team.

When you start being objective and start realizing that the Habs are average compared to other teams in the league, this is the day you will stop blaming the coaching staff.

And we went back full circle, gotta love circular logic

If the team is average but is winning, then team is winning because Therrien is good.

 

[radicalcenter]

Therrien being Therrien

After 2

Weise with more ice time than Galchenyuk
DD with more ice time than Pacioretty
Emelin with 5 more minutes of ice time than Beaulieu

 

[Mr Jackpot]

The top3 coaches togheter should be able to get a good record with a bad team like the Yotes, since coaches have a large amount of influence on the record and the record is the only way to evaluate coaching.

If the Coyotes would have the 3 best coaches in their club (which only happens in your unicorn world) yes they would battle for a playoffs spot in the west. Because coaching plays a big part in a team success, I hope this is something you just didn't learn today.

An exemple of how coaching plays a big part in a team success: look at the Islanders, the Trashers, the Blue Jackets in the 2000's, look at the Oilers in the recent years, all these teams had very high draft picks and they couldn't take their team to the other level.

And the funny thing is one of these 4 clubs that once made the playoffs was the Trashers coached by Bob Hartley.

And to finish, a big LOL if you think that journalists follows the team and knows the players and knows what's happening within the team, you're completely delusional.

 

[OnTheRun]

If the Coyotes would have the 3 best coaches in their club (which only happens in your unicorn world) yes they would battle for a playoffs spot in the west. Because coaching plays a big part in a team success, I hope this is something you just didn't learn today.

An exemple of how coaching plays a big part in a team success: look at the Islanders, the Trashers, the Blue Jackets in the 2000's, look at the Oilers in the recent years, all these teams had very high draft picks and they couldn't take their team to the other level.

And the funny thing is one of these 4 clubs that once made the playoffs was the Trashers coached by Bob Hartley.

And to finish, a big LOL if you think that journalists follows the team and knows the players and knows what's happening within the team, you're completely delusional.

You're going to hurt yourself flip-flopping like that man.

 

[Nynja*]

Hey Jackpot, answer this

0-3 in the first 3 games last year against Tampa in the playoffs. That record?

 

[Mr Jackpot]

0-3 in the first 3 games last year against Tampa in the playoffs. That record?

The same 3 first games that the Habs dominated at 5 on 5?

The same game #3 that Tyler Johnson scored with 1 seconds left and after the game Jon Cooper said: "We got outplayed for the last 53 minutes of the game... We could have been easily been 0-3 in this series."

That was one of the easiest question ever.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

You're going to hurt yourself flip-flopping like that man.

Like I said earlier, I love the part when people have no more arguments, it's so pure.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

You're going to hurt yourself flip-flopping like that man.

Here's a list of people that follows the team (s), follow the player (s), know what's happening:

-Michel Therrien
-JJ Daigneault
-Clément Jodoin
-Marc Bergevin
-Rick Dudley
-Larry Carrière
-Trevor Timmins
-...