All Purpose Coaching Thread - Maurice, Assistants, Potential Replacements etc.

[cbcwpg]

Isn't Huddy in charge of our defence? Why is he not held responsible for this?

Huddy is such a glaring issue. He's the defensive coach, our defensive play is just as bad today as it's ever been, yet the people we have on defense would appear to be a talented bunch. And Huddy has been here since day 1. Why? What is wrong here?

I still question why the Jets even hired him in the first place. IMO when he played for Edmonton he was not a good d-man. His minuses were covered up by the fact he played on a team that could score goals at will and just out score everyone.

 

[Duke749]

Defensively, and our defenseman specifically, seem to be less then the sum of their parts IMO

 

[Aavco Cup]

Defensively, and our defenseman specifically, seem to be less then the sum of their parts IMO

I think that was recognized and we'll see different pairings in this game. Specifically Enstrom Myers.

 

[Channelcat]

Buff wasn't the issue on that 3rd goal and I don't know why it keeps getting brought up. Perreault was covering no one and screened Mason as well.

I don't why people keep saying otherwise. He was one of many issues on that play. It was completely broken. Buff accomplishes absolutely nothing there on a half hearted "check", he might as well just keep skating right to the bench. It was an absolutely comical play, much like any other we've seen from the Jets in their own zone over the last 6 years.

 

[Duke749]

I don't why people keep saying otherwise. He was one of many issues on that play. It was completely broken. Buff accomplishes absolutely nothing there on a half hearted "check", he might as well just keep skating right to the bench. It was an absolutely comical play, much like any other we've seen from the Jets in their own zone over the last 6 years.

Because Buff wasn't making the wrong play. Thought that was obvious but for some reason people want to single him out when Perreault couldn't bother to do anything useful.

 

[nobody important]

In that home opener, when Wheeler was fleeing the zone after the faceoff and we were scored upon, his face said it all to me. He knew exactly what he did. Whether you can change that behaviour or not, I don't know.

Yeah, I'm not so sure that expression had anything to do with self blame. That could easily be interpreted as a "what the f*** just happened" look directed at his teammates. Either way, when your supposed leader openly shows dismay after one goal, is it any wonder the team went into a tailspin for the rest of the period?

 

[surixon]

You so easily dismiss this. How do you know players don't follow Hendricks? Is this another assumption of yours? Your version doesn't mesh with all the anecdotal evidence out there

McDavid was one of Hendricks biggest supporters and probably was the Oiler who spoke most highly about him.

Ask yourself this......the org decides it wants to bring in a respected vet to have another way to "motivate" the establishment. They attempt a couple things at the XD the entry draft and free agency but it doesn't work out. In the end given the available budget and available players who else was there?

Yes it's an assumption As obviously I'm not in the room. My point was the Oilers culture turned when McDavid arrived not prior to it despite Hendricks being a big part of the room. Now maybe Hendricks had a good influence on a young kid in McDavid and maybe he'll have that on the youngsters here, but I remain unconvinced he will have any impact on well established vets.

As for who else is there, imo it will have to come from within in the org much like with Edmonton. Maybe Hendricks mentors Scheifele to take control but he won't do it himself.

 

[nobody important]

Yes it's an assumption As obviously I'm not in the room. My point was the Oilers culture turned when McDavid arrived not prior to it despite Hendricks being a big part of the room. Now maybe Hendricks had a good influence on a young kid in McDavid and maybe he'll have that on the youngsters here, but I remain unconvinced he will have any impact on well established vets.

As for who else is there, imo it will have to come from within in the org much like with Edmonton. Maybe Hendricks mentors Scheifele to take control but he won't do it himself.

I think getting rid of a couple of cancers in Hall and Yakupov had as much to do with the culture turnaround as getting McD.

 

[Aavco Cup]

I think getting rid of a couple of cancers in Hall and Yakupov had as much to do with the culture turnaround as getting McD.

Changing culture in an organization can take years

 

[Hockeyholic]

Honest question: Why was this guy extended? Players aren't dumb. They know he's fired with a long losing streak. Was it True North's way of ensuring Maurice gets paid when he's unemployed?

 

[Howard Chuck]

Buff wasn't the issue on that 3rd goal and I don't know why it keeps getting brought up. Perreault was covering no one and screened Mason as well.

I'm not sure if you are referring to my post about Buff. To be clear, I wasn't addressing any specific goal, just what happens in general. And it's not just Buff, but our system that not only allows this but demands it.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Honest question: Why was this guy extended? Players aren't dumb. They know he's fired with a long losing streak. Was it True North's way of ensuring Maurice gets paid when he's unemployed?

The extension doesn't matter. If the team made the playoffs he would have been extended regardless. If they don't he won't be the coach next season.

The extension changed nothing as far as Maurice continued employment is concerned.

It did remove any potential media based distraction.

 

[Howard Chuck]

Yeah, I'm not so sure that expression had anything to do with self blame. That could easily be interpreted as a "what the **** just happened" look directed at his teammates. Either way, when your supposed leader openly shows dismay after one goal, is it any wonder the team went into a tailspin for the rest of the period?

Either way you're correct. That is no way for a leader to react within a game.

 

[Howard Chuck]

The extension doesn't matter. If the team made the playoffs he would have been extended regardless. If they don't he won't be the coach next season.

The extension changed nothing.

Exactly. I don't know why people focus on this. The extension was announced to take any focus off of playing hockey. If we are failing, then he will be gone regardless. TNSE has shown that they want to win at all costs this year, I don't think they are going to let a few million dollars ruin an entire season.

This isn't to say that there won't be other reasons for us to fail, but the extension isn't one of them imo.

 

[ps241]

I bailed on the site for a few days because I sensed there might be some overreaction to getting curb stomped/humiliated by the leafs. Good idea to open this thread dedicated to coaching to heard us cats a bit.

I just want to say a few things about system integration for a professional hockey team. I feel like Maurice and our org are over talking this topic as usual. Off the top of my head Ken Hitchcock in St Louis, Darryl Sutter in LA, and Mike Sullivan in Pittsburgh are 3 coaches who took over teams in season and had their respective teams playing a coherent system within weeks. This is not Rocket Science all hockey players have played a similar forms of systems since they were kids. It comes down to buy in and execution.

I am not panicking over one bad game but my position has not changed on Maurice since the beginning of last season..... I would keep the leash short on Paul and have a back up plan ready to go if this starts slipping away (probably US Thanksgiving at the earliest or January 13th at the latest). Playoffs is mandatory this season and there are no excuses.

 

[Unholy goalie]

I think there's enough documented out there to suggest that we have to move beyond Maurice and company. We've talked about win%, systems, and player usage enough around here to have some serious concerns about the current coaching staff's ability to guide this team to any level of playoff success. In the very least, everyone should be able to concede that there are most definitely better coaches out there that we could be pursuing.

I'm also going to go out on a limb here and extend this to the leadership group as well. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't think Wheeler and Buff are leadership material. These are guys who are great players and well liked teammates, but that doesn't make them leaders. They have had influence in the room, but only in terms of popularity and less in terms of respect. Jets management has confused popularity and talent with leadership qualities and it ultimately has repercussions on the ice. I think they realised that mistake after last season. Think about it.. would the Jets have really thrown a league minumim contract to a washed up player like Hendricks if they felt full confidence in our leadership group's ability to set the tone and mentor the youth on this team? The Oilers brought him in for this reason and they legitimately had no leadership. We pretend we do, but probably don't, and there is this constant yet unexplained desire for "good room guys" that I don't think is explained by an oldschool fetish of Maurice's.

Scheif is the exception here, and I wish they would have given him the C. Give Little an A for crying out loud, and drop the other one on Wheels if you want.. but it might just as well go to someone like Perreault who seems like he's giving 110% every night and not afraid to speak his mind.

I don't think we can change decisions already made regarding the current leadership group (although I would advocate for it if I felt we could make changes with little to no detriment). But we CAN change the coaching staff and plant some coaches who have more credibility hockey-wise than our leadership group.

I'm on the Sutter/Howerchuck train for early 2018. While we're at it, let's bring in Reese to work with Mason and Helle.

 

[broinwhyteridge]

Jan 14-19

Jan 13th it is then.

 

[Duke749]

Idk how anyone can suggest Wheeler isn't respected.

 

[Jetsfan87]

Honest question: Why was this guy extended? Players aren't dumb. They know he's fired with a long losing streak. Was it True North's way of ensuring Maurice gets paid when he's unemployed?

It removes the "lame duck coach". Happens all the time in professional sports.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Yes it's an assumption As obviously I'm not in the room. My point was the Oilers culture turned when McDavid arrived not prior to it despite Hendricks being a big part of the room. Now maybe Hendricks had a good influence on a young kid in McDavid and maybe he'll have that on the youngsters here, but I remain unconvinced he will have any impact on well established vets.

As for who else is there, imo it will have to come from within in the org much like with Edmonton. Maybe Hendricks mentors Scheifele to take control but he won't do it himself.

Sounds like your just looking for things that confirm your own bias to me. Like I said changing culture doesn't happen in a day and perhaps in Edmonton it didn't happen until silver spoon Taylor Hall was traded. Perhaps Hendricks had a role there in that decision.

Things are never as black and white as you have suggested here. Personality is a big factor in leadership.

I could describe Hendricks this way. A player who commands enough respect and who has the required personality and confidence to actually get in a Buff or a Wheeler's face. Someone from outside who can say "this is wrong guys" and won't upset the current pecking order on the team.

Is my speculation correct? I don't know. But you must know in your heart that you don't know either. If you let your bias down for a minute.

If true will it work? Who knows

Perhaps what Hendricks observes will have a large bearing on how long some of these players remain Winnipeg Jets

Buff
Trouba
Myers
Enstrom
Wheeler
Perreault

 

[buggs]

Like PS I've avoided the site, at least posting, for the past couple of days. It is just a single game. That's what I keep telling myself. So I sat on it for a while.

Maybe it's just kneejerk, mob mentality on my part but I've been on the "Turf" Maurice/Huddy/Flaherty bandwagon for over a year now, longer with the latter two.

We have a talented defensive corps. Buff is, has been and always will be, problematic but if you remove emotion, on balance he's a substantial addition on the ice. Enstrom has slipped but his role has been reduced as well. Trouba and Morrissey are young and talented but they will have off games. Myers, Kulikov, Poolman are arguably better than any third pair out there. Yet this group routinely underperforms (how does Hainsey play so much better elsewhere? Why was Oduya so much better in Chicago?) and reading through HF boards you can see that the defensive inefficiency of the Jets is well understood. It wasn't all on Hainsey or Oduya. What we have is a repeated systemic issue that trace back to our coaching.

Our goaltending is less straightforward given Pavelec was an extremely athletic goaltender but positionally poor. Yet he consistently underperformed. Hellebuyck too underperformed given a chance and while many here see issues with his glove hand (I see it too) the issues run deeper than that. Yet we've failed to see improvement under the current goalie coach for going on 7 years. How that does not point to a systemic, internal issue I fail to understand.

Maurice's record stands on its own. We've had visits from Carolina and Toronto fans warning us, not impolitely, in the past that we are fated to a poor record so long as he coaches here. As PS and others have indicated systems in hockey are not novel for the players on our team. They'll have played versions of the same systems for different coaches throughout their career. Something is causing the shortfall for the players but it most assuredly shouldn't be an inability to understand whatever system is implemented. Someone mentioned that players check out when a coach's systems are not going to work but they're forced to play them (and watch them fail anyway). I see this across levels and athletes are not dumb in regards to the games they've played for their entire lives. What you end up with is a failed system, not because the players don't know how to play it, rather because they know that system won't work - the evidence is repeated often and painfully, we're just watching it again this year in spite of having seen the same thing last year. The roster is not remotely short on talent, it's being used improperly.

tl:dr

 

[surixon]

Sounds like your just looking for things that confirm your own bias to me. Like I said changing culture doesn't happen in a day and perhaps in Edmonton it didn't happen until silver spoon Taylor Hall was traded. Perhaps Hendricks had a role there in that decision.

Things are never as black and white as you have suggested here. Personality is a big factor in leadership.

I could describe Hendricks this way. A player who commands enough respect and who has the required personality and confidence to actually get in a Buff or a Wheeler's face. Someone from outside who can say "this is wrong guys" and won't upset the current pecking order on the team.

Is my speculation correct? I don't know. But you must know in your heart that you don't know either. If you let your bias down for a minute.

If true will it work? Who knows

Perhaps what Hendricks observes will have a large bearing on how long some of these players remain Winnipeg Jets

Buff
Trouba
Myers
Enstrom
Wheeler
Perreault

Of course i dont know that I'm correct. I'm just giving my opinion on the matter and yes it's influenced by my own personal bias just as everyone's is. Maybe Hendricks makes a world of difference, maybe he doesn't. It's not like posters haven't used the same rationale for other so called great locker room guys like Stuart and Thor. In the end theor inability to help the team on the ice neglects anything positive in the room imo.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Of course i dont know that I'm correct. I'm just giving my opinion on the matter and yes it's influenced by my own personal bias just as everyone's is. Maybe Hendricks makes a world of difference, maybe he doesn't. It's not like posters haven't used the same rationale for other so called great locker room guys like Stuart and Thor. In the end theor inability to help the team on the ice neglects anything positive in the room imo.

I used to think just like you. I've actually tried to eliminate as much as I can to try to better understand why Hendricks is here. Toth was the first one to suggest this idea publicly about Hendricks. I don't think he came up with that on his own. I'll just say that.

Re Stuart and Thorburn: not the same as Hendricks. They were long established in the team pecking order right. Not at all the same as bringing in an outsider is it?

You see them as the same but I don't. I think they were looking for other players earlier in the offseason but things didn't happen

 

[surixon]

I used to think just like you. I've actually tried to eliminate as much as I can to try to better understand why Hendricks is here. Toth was the first one to suggest this idea publicly about Hendricks. I don't think he came up with that on his own. I'll just say that.

Re Stuart and Thorburn: not the same as Hendricks. They were long established in the team pecking order right. Not at all the same as bringing in an outsider is it?

You see them as the same but I don't. I think they were looking for other players earlier in the offseason but things didn't happen

I think your misinterpreting my response. I 100% understand why he was brought in, I just don't believe for a second that it will have an impact on the players that I believe it will need to for it to work. I subscribe more so to Garrett's philosophy that NHL orgs still haven't figured out the correct traits needed to influence the intangible aspect of teams.

I also agree that they were trying to bring in some other players this off-season but it fell through.

 

[Aavco Cup]

I think your misinterpreting my response. I 100% understand why he was brought in, I just don't believe for a second that it will have an impact on the players that I believe it will need to for it to work. I subscribe more so to Garrett's philosophy that NHL orgs still haven't figured out the correct traits needed to influence the intangible aspect of teams.

I also agree that they were trying to bring in some other players this off-season but it fell through.

I understand what you are saying. I'm just trying to get you to think past your own biases as I have tried to do.

You believe a player has to be a star to be a leader. I don't think that's always true

You equate a Hendricks impact on the room with Thorburn and Stuart yet those guys have never been described as leaders and you discount the impact of having an outsider.

The Jets don't seem to be in any hurry to insert Hendricks into the lineup at least not yet. I think Maurice said he won't play in the next two and unlikely in Van.

In the end it's just a $700k experiment.