Why was Wayne Gretzky such a bad coach?

[Summer Rose]

Coaches can’t really make a roster better than what it is other than employing a system. They weren’t a very good team in my memory. I never felt like it had anything to do with Gretzky.

A good coach can take a roster and at least make the sum greater than its parts. Look what happened when Dave Tippett came.

Gretzky did the opposite.

 

[Bubbles]

I remember the Sjostrom fiasco. Andy Murray would have called it in-game had Freddy scored, but the Kings staff tipped off the refs. Would have gone viral had it happened now.

 

[mouser]

Coaches can’t really make a roster better than what it is other than employing a system. They weren’t a very good team in my memory. I never felt like it had anything to do with Gretzky.

Gretzky was a lot more than just a head coach. He was hired as Managing Partner of the Coyotes and also in charge of Hockey Operations. Further, Gretzky hired his former agent Mike Barnett to be the team GM with no prior experience in a role like that.

 

[Dingo]

Patrick Roy, Rod Brindamour & MSL aren't too bad albeit no cups as coaches so far.

brind'amour and St. louis are both great examples of guys who experienced every role. Who had to fight their way to the top. Star players, for sure, but the gritty kind, who flew under radars for a long time.

Roy pulls his goalie in the wrong end, shorthanded, lol.

Larry Robinson was a great coach and player, as has been brought up, and the closest to 'superstar' status of the ones mentioned. I would still argue that he is of the grit, toughness, determination side of the superstar coin, though.

 

[pezpunk]

most great coaches were fringe NHLrs, or didnt even quite make it.

Id say that those guys would likely largely be star centers as kids, 2nd liners as juniors, and role players in the league they got to. They would have run the gamut, able to relate to any player.

Superstars only ever do superstar things. And they cant relate to what normal people struggle with.

This is the real answer. The ones who had the skills to transcend the game are never going to know as much, in terms of deep knowledge and attention to detail, as the guys who were just barely hanging on and fighting for their career with every shift.

You see it in every sport. The superstars do not turn in to superstar coaches. It’s the washouts or the pluggers who end up in the HOF for their coaching abilities. The ones who were FORCED to learn every nook and cranny of advantage in order to survive. To see it from above as a game of chess instead of enforcing their physical will on others, exploiting their natural talent or advantage.

Arguably there is also the charisma element, which is also unrelated to being a superstar talent, but I think that’s tremendously horrendously overrated. You need the respect of your locker room, but that ultimately does NOT come from rah-rah speeches like a lot of people think. Speeches get old REAL fast no matter how good when you’re losing. Respect comes from winning and winning alone. And for that, you need someone who was forced by necessity of circumstances to study every angle of the game.