Syckle78
Registered User
If a player needs a specific coach to motivate him that's a huge problem and indictment on his character. Probably not the case you want to be making.Maybe he needs the right coach to motive him? Ever thought of that?
If a player needs a specific coach to motivate him that's a huge problem and indictment on his character. Probably not the case you want to be making.Maybe he needs the right coach to motive him? Ever thought of that?
Larkin was 8-1 on scoring chances for-against...
Athansiou was 4-15.
Pretty much tells the story.
Larkin doesn't score the highlight reel goals AA does but he's a better hockey player so who cares
Larkin was the reason we scored 2 goals last night.
If a player needs a specific coach to motivate him that's a huge problem and indictment on his character. Probably not the case you want to be making.
Blashill is probably one of the worst coaches in the history of the league
Based on what?
three full seasons as the head coach of the team?
Doesn't matter how bad of a coach you have you shouldn't need help with motivation. Being motivated and giving proper effort is the absolute minimum asked of a player. Especially a grown man being paid millions.needing a coach other than Jeff Blashill isn't really the same thing as needing a specific coach though
Blashill is probably one of the worst coaches in the history of the league
not that I necessarily think getting another coach would do much for AA,but I definitely wouldn't rule it out when it's Blashill we're talking about
When Blashill had even decent but aging material with Pavel still there, he matched the results what Babcock was able to do. Playoff spot and 1st round exit against Tampa Bay.
When Pavel left, this team has had no chances. Zero. None. I pretty much think anybody else couldn't do any magic tricks with those results after Pavel left. This Red Wings era after both Pavel and Z reting is will be one of most unpleasant time for any coach. It will be a downswing no one can stop for few seasons.
When team loses, people blaim the coach. Ok. That's the shortcut, if somebody likes to do so. Getting/missing elite talent is the problem, not the coach.
***
And of course, people will be raising up Blashill's results again, when there's THE next coach in the team with better results, with elite talent got from draft from Blashill's poor era- Then it will "prove" your point, when it will prove also my point. We have talent again, so the next coach will look good. Everybody will praise the next one.
Just think a second and then come to praise him for real reasons.
I feel like people vastly overstate the impact of losing Datsyuk,the guy put up 49 points(in 66 games) he wasn't exactly Gretzky out there
Blashill is probably one of the worst coaches in the history of the league
Dude, seriously. Come on now.
Have you witnessed anything remotely close to every coach in the history of the league? Are you familiar with their records, their styles, their opponents, etc?
Nah mate, you haven't. You're being absurdly hyperbolic for the sake of looking for a spacegoat, and it's not a good look.
Doesn't matter how bad of a coach you have you shouldn't need help with motivation. Being motivated and giving proper effort is the absolute minimum asked of a player. Especially a grown man being paid millions.
hence why I used the words "probably" and "one of"
I do think he's pretty decisively the very worst coach in the NHL currently is that better phrasing for you? and i've seen very few coaches throughout my lifetime that have even been close to as bad as he is
It's not about the phrasing, man, it's about the pretense of your entire argument. I'm no fan of Blash, but he's far from one of the worst in *my* lifetime, let alone the lifetime of the Red Wings.
Presently, I still don't think he's a bad coach; he's just trying to use a system for which he doesn't have the personnel.
I mean, ****, in '15-'16 Blashill inherited essentially the same roster that Babcock had from '14-'15, and the records were 43-25-14 and 41-30-11 respectively. That's not a massive difference between one guy widely considered the best coach in the world, and one guy who is, according to you, "one of the worst ever." The difference between Toronto and Detroit now is about 10 years of "rebuild."
Again, allow me to be perfectly clear: I am NOT a fan of Blashill's coaching style, especially considering the personnel the Wings are icing. What I am debating, however, is that he is a completely **** coach.
as far as the whole Babcock thing goes I think when Babcock moved on he was actually holding the team back,he's a good coach but it was just time for a change(his message was a bit stale and there were all sorts of reports coming out about the players wanting him gone and such),I actually think it says something about Blashill that he was unable to come in in a situation like that and make the team better
they also declined in performance a bit more than that record would indicate,for one thing they went from a positive 14 goal differential to a negative 13 one which is actually a bigger swing than there was between Blashill's first year and his other two,they went from a +1.3 shot differential/game to an even one,their team corsi went from 6th best in the league to 25th best etc it was actually a somewhat significant drop if you dig into it a bit more
I think his parents taught him fine. He makes millions of dollars playing hockey and is a 23 year old kid.But apparently he is also a career criminal the way you paint him out to be lol
I have yet to see Larkin score all the highlight reel goals AA has....
I feel like people vastly overstate the impact of losing Datsyuk,the guy put up 49 points(in 66 games) he wasn't exactly Gretzky out there
then they replace him and an incredibly washed up Brad Richards with 48 games of Vanek as well as Frans Nielsen
I think the bigger impact is that Blashill just hadn't had as much time on the job yet,the more he "coaches" these guys the worse they get and I don't think that's a coincidence
How much input do you think Blashill has on player signings ? That falls mostly on Holland.
Blashill has to coach what is on the ice in front of him.
This is stupid, you can complain about players' character all you want, but the only objective is to win hockey games. What if Gretzky was autistic and the only way he could play the way he did was to play under one specific coach? You get that coach, obviously, because you want the player to be the best he can be, so you win more games.Doesn't matter how bad of a coach you have you shouldn't need help with motivation. Being motivated and giving proper effort is the absolute minimum asked of a player. Especially a grown man being paid millions.
This is stupid, you can complain about players' character all you want, but the only objective is to win hockey games. What if Gretzky was autistic and the only way he could play the way he did was to play under one specific coach? You get that coach, obviously, because you want the player to be the best he can be, so you win more games.
This is stupid, you can complain about players' character all you want, but the only objective is to win hockey games. What if Gretzky was autistic and the only way he could play the way he did was to play under one specific coach? You get that coach, obviously, because you want the player to be the best he can be, so you win more games.
No one knows if a problem lies with Blash or AA regarding his motivation. But a good coach knows each player is motivated differently. Some players respond to a kick in the ***. Some need a pat on the back. Is Blashill a good coach that knows how to motivate different players. Who knows?If a player needs a specific coach to motivate him that's a huge problem and indictment on his character. Probably not the case you want to be making.
No one knows if a problem lies with Blash or AA regarding his motivation. But a good coach knows each player is motivated differently. Some players respond to a kick in the ***. Some need a pat on the back. Is Blashill a good coach that knows how to motivate different players. Who knows?