NEXT COACH should be? mega thread ...

[WildCard]

4 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

John Shannon is reporting that both the Sabres and Senators have requested permission to speak with him 

?

[SDS]

15 minutes ago, ... said:

Older re-re-re-tread with no history of real success.

Were his rosters consistently constructed for real success?

[Doohicksie]

I think it would be like saying that you wanted Connor Sheary as your #1 LW.  He has a proven level of competence at the NHL level, but we also know his ceiling and it's simply not as a #1 LW (or in Martin's case, as a HC of a Stanley Cup contender).  His ceiling is known, and we should shoot for better than that.

[...]

12 minutes ago, Eleven said:

That and a lack of professional distance from Botterill.

Yes. This is absolutely a serious lack of courage and imagination on Botterill's part, especially if he makes the hire.

5 minutes ago, SDS said:

Were his rosters consistently constructed for real success?

Dunno. If they were, that just makes his record worse.

Edited April 24, 2019 by ...

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, SDS said:

Were his rosters consistently constructed for real success?

He had a few good Ottawa teams that underachieved and his first Montreal squad overachieved.

But overall, no.

Its the coaching equivalent of re-signing Jason Pominville.

[Radar]

28 minutes ago, Curtisp5286 said:

Legitimate question:  Why is Jacques Martin a bad coaching choice?  I want actual reasons relating directly to Martin himself.

Just to clarify, I’m not in favor of Martin, but I would like to hear actual opinions of him as a coach.

My earlier post was not to say I'm for or against his being hired. Simply saying he meets the criteria of what people have been talking about. Experience as head coach. Has, in spite of some posts, won and been even awarded as coach of year in his past I believe. Whether he's my choice or I'd prefer someone else is irrelevant to the fact he seems to check most boxes of what we're saying they will look for. By the way, when I posted questioning if Babcock is a great coach or a good coach I said you need to see the talent he's had to work with. When coaching talented teams Martin won a lot. Babcock won a lot but his playoff record is questionable. Record wise they've both been good coaches.

[Radar]

32 minutes ago, ... said:

Older re-re-re-tread with no history of real success.

Wrong about "no history of success". Older? Correct. 're-'re-'re-retread? Correct. Sounds like most former head coaches respected enough to have stayed in the business for a long period. The question is do you want new face or experienced? Both have their proponents and those opposed to them.

[LGR4GM]

7 minutes ago, Radar said:

My earlier post was not to say I'm for or against his being hired. Simply saying he meets the criteria of what people have been talking about. Experience as head coach. Has, in spite of some posts, won and been even awarded as coach of year in his past I believe. Whether he's my choice or I'd prefer someone else is irrelevant to the fact he seems to check most boxes of what we're saying they will look for. By the way, when I posted questioning if Babcock is a great coach or a good coach I said you need to see the talent he's had to work with. When coaching talented teams Martin won a lot. Babcock won a lot but his playoff record is questionable. Record wise they've both been good coaches.

Dan Dylsma won coach of the year and a Stanley Cup and I wouldn't let him coach me to order a pizza. 

But in all seriousness, I like the idea of a new coach over some older coach who has experience. Just because you have experience doesn't mean you are better or good at your job. He hasn't been a head coach since 2012 I think. Why is that? There have been lots of coaching changes and yet he was not given another shot. Some people are good assistants but as we found out with Housley, they don't make good head coaches. I would rather go younger with more recent head coaching experience. 

[MODO Hockey]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Dan Dylsma won coach of the year and a Stanley Cup and I wouldn't let him coach me to order a pizza. 

But in all seriousness, I like the idea of a new coach over some older coach who has experience. Just because you have experience doesn't mean you are better or good at your job. He hasn't been a head coach since 2012 I think. Why is that? There have been lots of coaching changes and yet he was not given another shot. Some people are good assistants but as we found out with Housley, they don't make good head coaches. I would rather go younger with more recent head coaching experience. 

Rikard Grönborg ? did u listen to the interview?

[Radar]

24 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I think it would be like saying that you wanted Connor Sheary as your #1 LW.  He has a proven level of competence at the NHL level, but we also know his ceiling and it's simply not as a #1 LW (or in Martin's case, as a HC of a Stanley Cup contender).  His ceiling is known, and we should shoot for better than that.

Okay. Then give us the names you have in mind of the Stanley cup contending coach looking for the job.

[...]

3 minutes ago, Radar said:

Wrong about "no history of success". Older? Correct. 're-'re-'re-retread? Correct. Sounds like most former head coaches respected enough to have stayed in the business for a long period. The question is do you want new face or experienced? Both have their proponents and those opposed to them.

STL	1986–87	80	32	33	15	–	79	1st in Norris	2	4	.333	Lost in First round
STL	1987–88	80	34	38	8	–	76	2nd in Norris	5	5	.500	Lost in Second round
OTT	1995–96	38	10	24	4	–	(41)	6th in Northeast	0	0	–	Missed Playoffs
OTT	1996–97	82	31	36	15	–	77	3rd in Northeast	3	4	.429	Lost in First round
OTT	1997–98	82	34	33	15	-	83	5th in Northeast	5	6	.455	Lost in Second round
OTT	1998–99	82	44	23	15	-	103	1st in Northeast	0	4	.000	Lost in First round
OTT	1999–2000	82	41	28	11	2	95	2nd in Northeast	2	4	.333	Lost in First round
OTT	2000–01	82	48	21	9	4	109	1st in Northeast	0	4	.000	Lost in First round
OTT	2001–02	80	38	26	9	7	94	3rd in Northeast	7	5	.583	Lost in Second round
OTT	2002–03	82	52	21	8	1	113	1st in Northeast	11	7	.611	Lost in Conf. Finals
OTT	2003–04	82	43	23	10	6	102	3rd in Northeast	3	4	.429	Lost in First round
FLA	2005–06	82	37	34	–	11	85	4th in Southeast	0	0	–	Missed Playoffs
FLA	2006–07	82	35	31	–	16	86	4th in Southeast	0	0	–	Missed Playoffs
FLA	2007–08	82	38	35	–	9	85	3rd in Southeast	0	0	–	Missed Playoffs
MTL	2009–10	82	39	33	–	10	88	4th in Northeast	9	10	.474	Lost in Conf. Finals
MTL	2010–11	82	44	30	–	8	96	2nd in Northeast	3	4	.429	Lost in First round
MTL	2011–12	32	13	12	–	7	(78)	5th in Northeast	-	-	-	(fired)

 

I don't see any Stanley Cups there. Lots of first round exits. Probably very similar to Lindy's record.

Unless he's an actual proponent of using advanced stats as a tool, and actually uses them, I'd prefer to take a chance on a "modern" style coach.  

 

[Radar]

5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Dan Dylsma won coach of the year and a Stanley Cup and I wouldn't let him coach me to order a pizza. 

But in all seriousness, I like the idea of a new coach over some older coach who has experience. Just because you have experience doesn't mean you are better or good at your job. He hasn't been a head coach since 2012 I think. Why is that? There have been lots of coaching changes and yet he was not given another shot. Some people are good assistants but as we found out with Housley, they don't make good head coaches. I would rather go younger with more recent head coaching experience. 

You make good points.

[Gatorman0519]

My gosh this organization never learns or thinks progressively.  Unbelievable. 

[Doohicksie]

1 minute ago, Radar said:

Okay. Then give us the names you have in mind of the Stanley cup contending coach looking for the job.

No, no, no.  You don't understand.  My job is just to throw darts.

[Radar]

Just now, Gatorman0519 said:

My gosh this organization never learns or thinks progressively.  Unbelievable. 

Names of your choices with detailed reasons please?

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, Radar said:

Names of your choices with detailed reasons please?

There is an entire thread with some of this info. We spent a full page on Sheldon Keefe I am fairly certain. 

https://theathletic.com/935158/2019/04/21/top-candidates-to-fill-nhl-coaching-vacancies-from-the-big-names-to-the-lesser-known/

Edited April 24, 2019 by LGR4GM

[...]

Just now, Radar said:

Names of your choices with detailed reasons please?

Dude, there's 27 pages of that.

[Gatorman0519]

1 minute ago, Radar said:

Names of your choices with detailed reasons please?

I given 3 of them multiple times. 

[Radar]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

There is an entire thread with some of this info. We spent a full page on Sheldon Keefe I am fairly certain. 

Experienced, contended for Stanley cup? I'm not putting down Keefe. Just made the point that he's not experienced as a head coach but Martin is. Frankly I'd be okay with young guy like Keefe but I go back to the criteria we've speculated they will look for matches Martin more so than Keefe. Maybe their not looking for experience as a head NHL head coach but I was commenting based upon hearing those reports.

8 minutes ago, ... said:

Dude, there's 27 pages of that.

Thanks, Dude. Personally I hate that description but since you chose to use it.......

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, Radar said:

Experienced, contended for Stanley cup? I'm not putting down Keefe. Just made the point that he's not experienced as a head coach but Martin is. Frankly I'd be okay with young guy like Keefe but I go back to the criteria we've speculated they will look for matches Martin more so than Keefe. Maybe their not looking for experience as a head NHL head coach but I was commenting based upon hearing those reports.

Thanks, Dude. Personally I hate that description but since you chose to use it.......

Keefe has been a head coach for the last 4 years at the professional level. He has been a head coach more recently than Martin. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by LGR4GM

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

44 minutes ago, SDS said:

Were his rosters consistently constructed for real success?

Well, he had some success with Rob Ray, Vaclav Varada, and Denis Hamel on the team.....oh yeah, and LaLime in net. That should qualify him, LOL.

[TrueBlueGED]

1 hour ago, kas23 said:

Unfortunately, I just JBotts knows he’s on the hot seat now. This is his last coaching hire. People in these types of situations usually act differently than they did when they were hired. There’s no more taking chances, like Housley. I bet he goes for a self-preservation safe pick, like JM. He’s not spectacular or a sexy pick, but he won’t likely get you fired because they’ll make the playoffs (and that’s about it). 

It's always funny to me how risk is framed. Martin is safe because he was a head coach who made the playoffs in the past. But that past was a decade ago. The guy hasn't been a head coach in 8 years. Eight! There's a huge risk to hiring him. 

[Radar]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Keefe has been a head coach for the last 4 years at the professional level. He has been a head coach more recently than Martin. 

Okay. That's why I qualified my remarks NHL head coaching experience. Look I never endorsed hiring or not hiring any one. I think my posts were objective comments but seem to have been met by an assumption I'm advocating Martin. I'm not.

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Radar said:

Okay. That's why I qualified my remarks NHL head coaching experience. Look I never endorsed hiring or not hiring any one. I think my posts were objective comments but seem to have been met by an assumption I'm advocating Martin. I'm not.

I know you aren't. I was just contrasting head coaching experience. Keefe has been a head coach more recently at a professional level. I think many view Martin as a failed head coach that we shouldn't give a 4th chance to. 

[Gatorman0519]

This is the equivalent of the Bills hiring Dick Jauron.  JBot will be on the curb in two years, Jack will be 25 and we will be starting our 4th rebuild in 10 years.  Rinse repeat... Buffalo Sports main problem is not a curse, but a refusal to hire competent progressive management.