He was right about Hyman. He was right about dermott. He was right about sparks. He was right about keeping marner and Matthews on separate lines. He was right about keeping minutes down. His defensive starts to OT have led to success. He was right about Leivo. He was right about the way the team played and competed. He was right the team needed more pushback.
He wasn't right about Hyman. He forced him into a role that he wasn't ready for yet. Also can't forget the time he kept throwing an injured Hyman out on the PK for Boston to repeatedly score on him in the playoffs.
He wasn't right about Dermott. Threatening to sit Dermott if we got Jensen is beyond stupid. This was a defense with 38 year old Hainsey, a broken down Gardiner that could barely skate with chronic back issues, and Zaitsev.
What exactly do you think he thought about Sparks? His comments on Sparks after the decision to make him their backup:
"Sparks has been in the organization for a long time and has built himself a history. His camp wasn’t what got it done. It was the history and knowing the guy and understanding that you’ve got a long way to go, but a 25-year-old guy going in the right direction has a chance to get there."
He was completely wrong in his adamant refusal to ever put Matthews-Marner together. They are one of the deadliest combos together, perfect skillset compliments, and were our two best players. Together, they have created one of if not the best line in hockey. He didn't have to play them together all the time, but his stubborn refusal to utilize that asset in any situation likely cost us at least one playoff series.
He was not right about suppressing their minutes. All that did was hurt our team, create more tension between players and staff, and make their contract negotiations more contentious.
Defensive starts to OT? What are you even talking about?
Leivo? What are you even talking about?
There seems to be a lot of revisionist history around here of what Babcock thought.
Pushback? Babcock's literally the one that said "our toughness is our power play".
There is no issue with the way our team competes, and there never has been. There was a problem with the way our team played, but that was because Babcock didn't have an effective system, and he ineffectively utilized his roster. That got massively better as soon as Babcock left.
How he chose to relay that message easily was his downfall.
Pretty important tool for a
coach.