Barry Trotz's tenure as Caps coach (RS: Healthy; Playoff: 2nd Round Exititis)

[Langway]

The real problem--and why this decision likely needs to be made now--is Trotz's contract status. If he had two years remaining it would be one thing but with just another year left it's a question of whether he's done enough to warrant an extension and the big bump in pay or not. If I'm MacLellan I'd have a hard time going to bat for him and the likely $3-4M salary he'll command at least. Maybe they settle for him being a lame duck and giving him one last chance to prove it but the timing here really works against him.

When you have players saying they have a mental funk they can't progress beyond and a coach that hasn't had any real NHL playoff success of note then I'd think a change is coming, particularly if ownership has already denied any chance of moving core players. Ownership IMO is still likely to remain loyal to Ovechkin over anyone else and it makes it way more likely that there will be a coaching change. It's a bad organizational dynamic, even if Ovechkin isn't explicitly the one making the decision. I don't think it will have anything to do with Ovechkin being demoted so much as a simple referendum on Trotz's value going forward vs. a dynamic that's otherwise not very easily solved. It may not be solved regardless but different voices and ideas are probably the more compelling option at this point.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Absolutely. Can't lame duck him can you? Probably would lead to malaise and player loss of focus and a mid-season firing. If they're not thinking "let's extend Barry", then firing may be the best approach to avoid in-season upheaval.

 

[artilector]

Ted's a businessman. I think $ and a sustainable/profitable business is his first priority. So I guess yeah, ultimately the bottom line matters most.

McPhee wasn't canned until some significant ticket cancellations occurred....loss of season ticket holder confidence. Maybe the timing was coincidental, but I suspect Ted weighs fan happiness in renewal %'s to a large extent.


Not saying he doesn't want to win championships, he's clearly a fan and enjoys living the persona of sports nice guy he's built for himself, but I don't think that's (winning it all) the 1st priority.

Just because (and even if) something is not your 1st priority, it doesn't mean that you won't feel the heat after spectacularly repetitive failure.

 

[OV Rocks]

Just because (and even if) something is not your 1st priority, it doesn't mean that you won't feel the heat after spectacularly repetitive failure.

If you are in sports, your number 1 priority has to be winning, that is it.

In Sport winning is everything

 

[artilector]

If you are in sports, your number 1 priority has to be winning, that is it.

In Sport winning is everything

If we're gonna make general statements, why not "In capitalism, money is everything"?!

 

[OV Rocks]

If we're gonna make general statements, why not "In capitalism, money is everything"?!

Look at the most successful sports organizations over the last ten years. They all focus on getting the best players they can get.

Patriots
Red Sox
Yankees
Penguins
Blackhawks
Warriors
Cavs
Heat

One do those teams have in common, elite players surronded by great players. Caps don't have that and won't have that until their mindset changes to all that matters is winning the Stanley Cup

If you want to succeed in sport the number 1 priority has to be winning simple as that

 

[OV Rocks]

If what is clearly wrong with this team is the mindset then there is your answer

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Just because (and even if) something is not your 1st priority, it doesn't mean that you won't feel the heat after spectacularly repetitive failure.

Then the heat he feels, IMO is only self driven. He answers to no one as majority owner really except to mass fan revolt.

 

[artilector]

If what is clearly wrong with this team is the mindset then there is your answer

The original point of the discussion was what "is" Leonsis's mindset, not what it "ideally ought to be from a fan's perspective". On that second point I'm sure we all agree.

 

[artilector]

Then the heat he feels, IMO is only self driven. He answers to no one as majority owner really except to mass fan revolt.

"Caps fail again" in the news, year after year, also hurts the ego

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

"Caps fail again" in the news, year after year, also hurts the ego

Oh totally ego...I've heard him talk about this in person. He feels like he's making the right moves as an owner largely IMO.

I'll say this last thing on his mindset....he's been pretty patient for a guy who is looking to win before anything else. Patient with the GM(s), fairly patient with coaches as long as they make the playoffs, doesn't appear to sign off on many super aggressive trades. Very businesslike in my estimation.

 

[Hivemind]

What BS.

At most one can say that young players may take longer to develop under Trotz. But his gradual approach actually seems to work pretty damn well, because he is also patient and does not give up on players. After going through it, Kuz & Orlov are doing quite well. Wilson's progress under Trotz has been near exemplary -- much credit to Wilson himself, ofc. Bura and Schmidt are on track. Who exactly has failed to develop??

I see plenty of issues that can make firing Trotz at least justifiable, but "failure to develop young talent" sure as hell wouldn't be one of them.

So... you're just going to ignore his 15 years of history in Nashville (which had the same gripe) in favor of claiming turning a 2012 and 2013 1st round picks into 3rd liners in 2017 is developing talent?

On what planet is a 4th year pro scoring 19 points (and regressing on his previous season total) "near exemplary" development?

 

[g00n]

The guy who wrote that is a thread****ting Columbus fan and I deleted his ****post.

Tweet that.

 

[artilector]

So... you're just going to ignore his 15 years of history in Nashville (which had the same gripe) in favor of claiming turning a 2012 and 2013 1st round picks into 3rd liners in 2017 is developing talent?

On what planet is a 4th year pro scoring 19 points (and regressing on his previous season total) "near exemplary" development?

I don't claim anything about Nashville. Maybe he learned something from failures there. His 3-year history in Washington is a lot more relevant to me.

I also think your attempt to reduce development to numbers is very superficial in this case. From my perspective, Wilson was ruined by lack of AHL development, under Oates. At that point, getting him back to a reasonable development path would be a difficult task for any coach, and I think Trotz has done a very good job overall building Wilson back up. When Trotz came to the Caps, the fact that Wilson was a 1st pick on paper meant very little, so it's laughable, IMO, to use it as some sort of a measuring stick. While we're at it, some picks are plain busts in terms of offensive contribution, and Wilson never really showed flashes of natural offensive talent from the get go, so why are we assuming that he'd quickly blossom into a top-6 player even under ideal development?? If not for Trotz, he'd be a 20-20 guy right now because... why exactly?!

In terms of Burakovsky, I would actually agree that he could've been developed faster. But here's the key for me -- I don't believe that his development has been compromised in terms of ceiling. His overall game has improved consistently, and I don't see him as having lost any offensive ability. In fact, right now I am more confident that he's gonna blossom offensively, at least individually, because his overall game is gonna be good enough to keep him relevant even during bad stretches.

Btw, in Kuznetsov's case, I've observed MANY Russian players not make it in the NHL -- and in my opinion, Kuz could've easily been one of them, certainly on a team that's expecting fast results. Even if he stuck around because of talent, many coaches would just put him on wing as the far easier solution. The fact that he's turned into a bona fide CENTER that can be trusted with defensive assignments against guys like Matthews/Malkin is a bit of a f'in miracle, if you ask me. And even taking into account Kuz's talent, this is a huge credit to Trotz and his patience.

Anyway, to me it's BS. I'm sure there are coaches that generally develop OFFENSIVE talent FASTER. But IMO it's stupid to try to reduce development to this one measure. Personally, I'm interested in the all-around final result, and in this aspect, I'd give Trotz at least an A-, haha.

 

[OV Rocks]

I don't claim anything about Nashville. Maybe he learned something from failures there. His 3-year history in Washington is a lot more relevant to me.

I also think your attempt to reduce development to numbers is very superficial in this case. From my perspective, Wilson was ruined by lack of AHL development, under Oates. At that point, getting him back to a reasonable development path would be a difficult task for any coach, and I think Trotz has done a very good job overall building Wilson back up. When Trotz came to the Caps, the fact that Wilson was a 1st pick on paper meant very little, so it's laughable, IMO, to use it as some sort of a measuring stick. While we're at it, some picks are plain busts in terms of offensive contribution, and Wilson never really showed flashes of natural offensive talent from the get go, so why are we assuming that he'd quickly blossom into a top-6 player even under ideal development?? If not for Trotz, he'd be a 20-20 guy right now because... why exactly?!

In terms of Burakovsky, I would actually agree that he could've been developed faster. But here's the key for me -- I don't believe that his development has been compromised in terms of ceiling. His overall game has improved consistently, and I don't see him as having lost any offensive ability. In fact, right now I am more confident that he's gonna blossom offensively, at least individually, because his overall game is gonna be good enough to keep him relevant even during bad stretches.

Btw, in Kuznetsov's case, I've observed MANY Russian players not make it in the NHL -- and in my opinion, Kuz could've easily been one of them, certainly on a team that's expecting fast results. Even if he stuck around because of talent, many coaches would just put him on wing as the far easier solution. The fact that he's turned into a bona fide CENTER that can be trusted with defensive assignments against guys like Matthews/Malkin is a bit of a f'in miracle, if you ask me. And even taking into account Kuz's talent, this is a huge credit to Trotz and his patience.

Anyway, to me it's BS. I'm sure there are coaches that generally develop OFFENSIVE talent FASTER. But IMO it's stupid to try to reduce development to this one measure. Personally, I'm interested in the all-around final result, and in this aspect, I'd give Trotz at least an A-, haha.

Did he win a cup? No so its an F

 

[artilector]

Did he win a cup? No so its an F

Trotz get's an F for development because he didn't win the Cup?

Lol, if you can't keep track of context at least from the sentence immediately preceding the one you underlined, then that's some kind of a record.

 

[Hivemind]

I don't claim anything about Nashville. Maybe he learned something from failures there. His 3-year history in Washington is a lot more relevant to me.

So you are indeed disregarding 15 years of prior track record with the same gripe. Got it.

I also think your attempt to reduce development to numbers is very superficial in this case. From my perspective, Wilson was ruined by lack of AHL development, under Oates. At that point, getting him back to a reasonable development path would be a difficult task for any coach, and I think Trotz has done a very good job overall building Wilson back up. When Trotz came to the Caps, the fact that Wilson was a 1st pick on paper meant very little, so it's laughable, IMO, to use it as some sort of a measuring stick. While we're at it, some picks are plain busts in terms of offensive contribution, and Wilson never really showed flashes of natural offensive talent from the get go, so why are we assuming that he'd quickly blossom into a top-6 player even under ideal development?? If not for Trotz, he'd be a 20-20 guy right now because... why exactly?!

I agree that Oates helped botch Wilson's development (and was very critical of it at the time), but come on dude, at least try to be factual in your arguments here. Wilson could not play in the AHL during his one season under Oates. It was OHL or NHL.

Further still, Wilson had one year under Oates and three under Trotz. Trotz has had far more hands-on time with Wilson than Oates ever did. So far, the only thing Trotz has "built Wilson back up" to is a PK specialist and the least productive forward on the Capitals. The best you can argue is that Trotz has hit par for the course. Calling that some sort of masterful success (or "near exemplary" in your words) is ridiculous. I don't think anyone is arguing that Wilson should be a guaranteed 20/20 guy, but converting a player from a depth energy forward into a PKing depth energy forward isn't exactly a landmark achievement in player development.

Anyway, to me it's BS. I'm sure there are coaches that generally develop OFFENSIVE talent FASTER. But IMO it's stupid to try to reduce development to this one measure. Personally, I'm interested in the all-around final result, and in this aspect, I'd give Trotz at least an A-, haha.

A- doesn't win a Cup.

 

[OV Rocks]

Trotz get's an F for development because he didn't win the Cup?

Lol, if you can't keep track of context at least from the sentence immediately preceding the one you underlined, then that's some kind of a record.

All the good that you can take out of Trotz "development" of players can be taken in the exact opposite direction

Wilson: Pretty much the same player as when Trotz got him. Added the ability to PK but still takes penalties but produces less

Result: Even

Kuznetsov: Forced him to play a bit more reserved and less free wheeling by putting him with Williams. Kuzy is at his best with Ovechkin and Oshie but the moment Trotz couldn't "trust" kuzy he kicked him off the line. Wasted a cheap contract for a great player

Result: Negative

Burakovksy: Had a bad stretch in the season and ended up in the press box. Has NEVER had a chance to play with high end talent under Trotz until the last 3 games of the series. He is a really good player but what has he developed into under Trotz? Stayed relatively the same

Result: Negative

Orlov and Schmidt: This one is tough because he clearly has gotten better but how much of that is Reirdon and Niskanen. Trotz yanked them the moment there was a sign trouble last post season. Playing scrubs in place of two young puck movers. They both got better but they were both also very limited.
Don't even get me started about not playing Schmidt until Alzner went down. Another waste of two young players on cheap contracts

Result: Negative

How many guys from Hershey have played more than 20 games the last two seasons?
He can't take credit for Holtby that is all Korn
He hasn't helped Ovi evolve, actually regressed

Look at it however you want but Trotz is sitting at an F in every category in my book.
Results: F
Development: F
Adaption: F
Eyebrows: F

 

[g00n]

So far, the only thing Trotz has "built Wilson back up" to is a PK specialist and the least productive forward on the Capitals.

Wow.

 

[RandyHolt]

I have a feeling Trotz may survive. Dick may look at Holts shaky playoffs and decide it was not Barry's fault at all.

Demoting Ovi in the 11th hour was good for one good outburst but otherwise we saw him struggle to score at ES for months. He held firm with his lines as our post spring break slow death almost mirrored the previous years blizzard meltdown. Barry can get 1 great month out of the team, per season. Very inconsistent in whatever it is he is doing.

 

[RandyHolt]

The guy who wrote that is a thread****ting Columbus fan and I deleted his ****post.

Tweet that.

Jonathan Sherman just may be that guy.

 

[artilector]

So you are indeed disregarding 15 years of prior track record with the same gripe. Got it.

If something happened a decade ago in Nashville, and hasn't happened in three years in Washington, I'm not sure why one should give Nashville events anything approaching equal weight. The more logical hypothesis (if all this is true) would be that he indeed learned something in Nashville.

Come to think of it, the Nashville stuff is mostly hearsay. Exactly what great offensive talents took off after leaving Nashville? As far as I can tell, most Nashville complaints are pretty much the same about ours -- that his systems are/were too conservative. But the only specific example of a young guy "stifled" by Trotz I've seen.. is Forsberg. However, even with that example not nearly enough time passed to assert anything like cause-and-effect. If you looked at Kuz during the first season under Trotz, you could also say he got "stifled" -- but it clearly worked just fine, and there was logic behind it.

The only other young high quality offensive guy in Nashville that comes to mind is Radulov -- and Radulov developed just fine there.

This "15 years of stifled creativity" could be mostly hot air. They had no real native offensive talent for most of those years. If we're talking about lack of results from acquired superstars (Peter Forsberg, Kariya, etc), then it has nothing to do with development.

I agree that Oates helped botch Wilson's development (and was very critical of it at the time), but come on dude, at least try to be factual in your arguments here. Wilson could not play in the AHL during his one season under Oates. It was OHL or NHL.

Great... and this invalidates my argument that Wilson needed development time... how exactly?

Further still, Wilson had one year under Oates and three under Trotz. Trotz has had far more hands-on time with Wilson than Oates ever did. So far, the only thing Trotz has "built Wilson back up" to is a PK specialist and the least productive forward on the Capitals. The best you can argue is that Trotz has hit par for the course. Calling that some sort of masterful success (or "near exemplary" in your words) is ridiculous. I don't think anyone is arguing that Wilson should be a guaranteed 20/20 guy, but converting a player from a depth energy forward into a PKing depth energy forward isn't exactly a landmark achievement in player development.

We just disagree on too many things here to keep going in circles. You don't see a big difference in Wilson's overall effectiveness and signs of better things to come. I do. OK...

A- doesn't win a Cup.

I never said that a letter of the alphabet can win a Cup

 

[Hivemind]

With regards to developing offensive forwards, here's what Preds fans are saying about Trotz right now:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2346621

He's great at getting the most out of marginal players, but always seemed to stifle the more creative players. I think to go really far there has to be an acceptable amount of risk allowed and he didn't really allow it. So he always has good results but never great.

Would Arvy have scored 31 goals in a season under Trotz? Ummmmmm....

Trotz could squeeze blood from a rock but he couldn't mine the gold right in front of his face. I think that's the best way to describe Trotz's tenure in Nashville. He was perfect for an expansion franchise.

Yep. I think that nails it. He was horrible at developing offensively gifted young players. He wanted defensive minded grinders that played to the edge of their ability. So funny that we are having this conversation. This time of year has always been loaded with fire Trotz talk. So ironic that it's happening with the Caps now. I remember when he left I thought he would finally break through with such a stud team. I guess not.

Trotz says he wants every player to play a 200 ft two-way game all the time. What he really wants is offensive skill players to buy in defensively. Guys that normally don't score are giving free passes if they play good defense.

I have never seen him criticize a defensive player for not scoring consistently but he's all over scorers when they play poor defensive games.

He also makes zero adjustments in games and series and depends on his system to correct itself.

 

[MrGone]

The original point of the discussion was what "is" Leonsis's mindset, not what it "ideally ought to be from a fan's perspective". On that second point I'm sure we all agree.

I think nine out of ten owners are business men first. Its about making money and that's it. And the ones that really stand out are driven by winning. And not just happy making the playoffs.

 

[Brian23]

With regards to developing offensive forwards, here's what Preds fans are saying about Trotz right now:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2346621

So literally every complaint we've had with him and everything his past said he'd have issues with. I think he was good to get the team on "track", as they're definitely a much more complete team now, but they need a new coach to get them over the hump.