Peter DeBoer after McLellan

[Gilligans Island]

I looked back on the stats one time and I think the Sharks had really good 3rd periods for a few years prior to 2010 but it's been awhile.

Yeah, I was wondering that. I remember a time awhile back when the Sharks were pretty decent during the 3rd period. They'd comeback fairly often.

I can't remember if that was the Wilson era or early TMac.

 

[rangerssharks414]

God, me too. I remember exactly where I was when Havlat scored that goal. Then we went out with a whimper outside of Thornton beasting and one highlight-worthy Burns goal.

Same.

As for DeBoer, I'm glad that I was wrong.

 

[whywilson]

Same.

As for DeBoer, I'm glad that I was wrong.

Eh I wouldn't fall in love yet. Personally I think DeBoer is still very similar to TMac and thats a big reason why he was hired. Also I don't think he is going to stay in SJ much longer than 4-5 years. Basically until the current core has moved on.

He does have a tendency to overachieve during his first year. And that actually isn't just on DeBoer but on many new coaches as players also feel as if they have something to prove when a new coach comes in. Things are looking well now but long term I don't think we will know how SJ truly will fare until we see how the team looks next season especially the young guys.

 

[hohosaregood]

Yeah, I was wondering that. I remember a time awhile back when the Sharks were pretty decent during the 3rd period. They'd comeback fairly often.

I can't remember if that was the Wilson era or early TMac.

Just did a little look back and it's pretty all over the place but we haven't had double digit 3rd periods since 2010. I did it by hand so numbers may have messed up but I think it's right.

Season|Period 1 Differential|Period 2 Differential|Period 3 Differential
2005-2006|3|20|2
2006-2007|8|43|10
2007-2008|27|-8|11
2008-2009|4|35|15
2009-2010|10|15|27
2010-2011|4|25|5
2011-2012|-9|19|6
2012-2013|10|-2|-1
2013-2014|36|6|2
2014-2015|-4|11|-8
2015-2016|5|8|15

 

[stator]

Same.

As for DeBoer, I'm glad that I was wrong.

Me too. My only small, saving grace was that I predicted that DeBoer will be one of the keys to success this year. He out-coached one of the league's best in round 1 which I would not have predicted at the start of the season.

 

[Sleepy]

Just did a little look back and it's pretty all over the place but we haven't had double digit 3rd periods since 2010. I did it by hand so numbers may have messed up but I think it's right.

Season|Period 1 Differential|Period 2 Differential|Period 3 Differential
2005-2006|3|20|2
2006-2007|8|43|10
2007-2008|27|-8|11
2008-2009|4|35|15
2009-2010|10|15|27
2010-2011|4|25|5
2011-2012|-9|19|6
2012-2013|10|-2|-1
2013-2014|36|6|2
2014-2015|-4|11|-8
2015-2016|5|8|15

Wow.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

It'll still be too early to call even if DeBoer wins the Cup this year just because one year compared to an entire body of work is an unfair comparison for coaches. I mean, I won't care about that if the team wins the Cup but just from a logical perspective. The first year of new coaches very often leads to positive results compared to the last year of an old coach so until DeBoer gets a little more into his body of work in San Jose, it's tough to make a fair comparison.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

pretty honest

 

[Pinkfloyd]

pretty honest

Yup and I'm not surprised. All the playoff experience you have at other levels is just not the same as this. But him learning from his experience and potentially pushing all the right buttons doesn't mean this team will win its next series. Although I do like his chances against Boudreau or Laviolette in terms of the coaching aspect of it.

 

[Sleepy]

pretty honest

I love DeBoer's comments. They're just so freaking honest. And he doesn't say pro-cess which made me want to stab my television.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

Just my 2 cents worth, aside from any specifics related to their approaches to the game (about which almost everyone here knows more/better than me):

DeBoer seems to me to be more of a unifying presence. He doesn't put himself above the players realizing that they are all professionals, that they all have to play their part in order for the team as a whole to be successful and that in the end no one is inherently more important than any one else.

TMac tends to place himself above the players and talk down to them a bit more. It's more like he's coaching players at a younger level who actually need a more directorial hand. Watching some of his Edmonton pressers this year, without having a personal commitment to what he was preaching, kind of highlighted that in him a bit more.

 

[Registered User]

Maybe...T-Mac was no stranger to juggling lines. I do think part of it is on the players. Deboer has some very versatile players that TMac didn't have; after all, it is up to the players to execute.

Forgive me but that's just BS players say when they want to show they're accountable. You know why coaching matters (more I'd argue than even the skill level of the team)? Because when you have a good coach, your team executes. Because a good coach can teach the game from a bird's eye, Xs and Os view and he can also coach technique on a fine level. Physical, mental technique. He'll catch and root out bad habits that would seem minor to a less-skilled, less-detail-oriented coach. A good coach communicates in a way that gets through to his players so they buy into his system and philosophy.

I know your larger point is that players are part of the problem (of course I agree with that) but I'm reading way too many comments out there (not necessarily here) about how coaching doesn't have much of an effect on a team or not as much of an effect as people think, when in actuality, the coach affects every aspect of a team, from the equipment guy to the superstar.

Just look at the Belichik's Patriots. Very few people would say that their players for the most part are top-notch, yet they execute better than stars at their position. Look at Tippett all those years when he coached basically an AHL + Doan that was DANGEROUS, but Edmonton doesn't improve one iota this year. Look what happened in Pittsburgh with Johnston and Sullivan.

Look at my 49ers before and after Jim Harbaugh. Matter of fact, look at Michigan and Stanford before and after Harbaugh.

Coaching matters. Boy does it matter. More than anything.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Coaching matters. Boy does it matter. More than anything.

Talent wins. MUCH MUCH more than anything.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Look at my 49ers before and after Jim Harbaugh. Matter of fact, look at Michigan and Stanford before and after Harbaugh..

Stanford has been much better since Harbaugh left. Much

29-21 with Harbaugh
54-14 with David Shaw

 

[Levie]

comparing hockey coaching to football coaching is not even a fair argument. Football is like chess, the coaches can call the plays from the sidelines. Hockey not so much.

I will say look at the Penguins. They won a cup with Bylsma. Now find me a football team that has won a championship with mediocre/bad coaching.

 

[polmaniac932]

Talent wins. MUCH MUCH more than anything.

There's a book, Soccernomics, that goes into this topic. One of its main arguments was that coaching had far less of an effect on wins than the on-field talent (the writers claim the highest correlation to wins in European leagues was the wages teams were willing to pay their players, which ended up attracting the highest talent, leading to wins). It even uses the 2002 World Cup as a case study of this: the Brazilian coach Scolari had no idea how to run or manage his team, and his goalkeeper was injured beyond belief. The players saved his poor tactics by winning the WC regardless.

I wonder how much that applies to hockey...

 

[polmaniac932]

comparing hockey coaching to football coaching is not even a fair argument. Football is like chess, the coaches can call the plays from the sidelines. Hockey not so much.

I will say look at the Penguins. They won a cup with Bylsma. Now find me a football team that has won a championship with mediocre/bad coaching.

Yes, a very different playing dynamic. That is a game where the canned plays will essentially determine your success. Hockey requires so much more on-the-fly intelligence, it's not very fair to compare the two.

 

[Registered User]

Yes, a very different playing dynamic. That is a game where the canned plays will essentially determine your success. Hockey requires so much more on-the-fly intelligence, it's not very fair to compare the two.

Well, I reject the notion that tactical decisions, or teaching sound technique, and putting your players in the best position to succeed, occupies some special space in American football that doesn't apply to other sports like hockey, which itself is some kind of unicorn of sports where improvisation is so important that Xs and Os don't matter and somehow player skill trumps coaching. How do you think these players got to be skilled in the first place? Did their coach in pee wee or juniors just throw them on the ice and say "go!" Is there anything to be said for how Detroit used to develop their prospects longer before they were allowed in NHL and saw them flourish?

I'll agree that football and hockey aren't the same sports and there are different areas of emphasis and aspects of coaching that have different weights in different areas of the game, depending on the sport. But I think it should be obvious to anyone who's ever had to perform on a team that, generally, coaching is incredibly key to a team's performance and cannot be overstated.

Check out what Kurz reported on Burns regarding his development as a d-man and the Norris nomination:

. . .
Burns credits coach Pete DeBoer for helping in that regard, erasing any ambiguity as to which position the 31-year-old would play.

From the first day since he spoke publicly as the new Sharks head coach, DeBoer made it clear to Burns and anyone else who was listening that Burns was going to play defense. No matter what.

At this stage of his career, that was just what Burns needed to hear.

“I think it was great with Pete coming in and just saying, ‘hey, he’s a d-man.’ I think that set the tone a little bit – not a little bit, a lot – for me,” Burns said.

“I’ve always kind of battled through that, going back and forth. Not battle, that’s the wrong word – but it’s always been there. Somebody gets hurt, it’s always like, 'hey, am I going to play wing? Am I staying? What’s going to happen?'

“Now, with [DeBoer] coming in and having [assistant coach Bob Boughner], he’s been huge behind the bench, during the game, after the games going through clips and stuff. It’s just been a huge help.”
. . .

Burns is saying PDB 1) put him in the best position to succeed; 2) in a system and an offensive and defensive scheme that allowed him to maximize his natural abilities; and, 3) coached him up big-time with in-game and on film.

P.S. Techniques like cycling, spacing on the PK, movement on the PP, set plays after a TO, stretch passing, and countless other dozens of discrete skills requires good coaching first and foremost, no different from the discrete skills involved on a football field...

 

[OrrNumber4]

....

Coaching certainly matters, it is just that the players matter too (of course!). I guess I have a certain view of how much of each facet a coach is responsible for, and how much is on the players. The coach can lead the horse to water, but he can't make it drink!

For the Sharks, a good example of this is Ron Wilson's final year. Think about his roster, circa 2007....closing minutes of the game, Sharks are up by one, who goes out on the ice? He had maybe four forwards: Marleau, Grier, Michalek, Brown (that's why Rissmiller would often play) and maybe four defensemen: Hannan, Vlasic, and McLaren. That's ignoring the relative inexperience of some of those players.

So the next year, with pretty much no outside acquisitions, he makes the team defensively focused. But too many players either didn't buy in or couldn't play that way...and Wilson was fired for it.

Back on topic:
IMO, TMac was somewhat spoiled by his time in Detroit, where he spent time with a veteran, talented, and versatile roster.

 

[pappaf2]

I think the NHL coaches role becomes much more important in the playoffs. During a multi fame series vs the same opponent there are adjustments that may have to get made that don't happen in the regular season.

 

[hohosaregood]

http://www.gacklereport.com/feature/sharks-burns-silences-critics-norris-trophy-nomination/

There's a little bit of talk about the difference between Boughner and Jim Johnson near the end.

 

[Trl3789]

Stanford has been much better since Harbaugh left. Much

29-21 with Harbaugh
54-14 with David Shaw

I know this is off topic, but that's a huge misrepresentation. Harbaugh took over a 1-11 team. Shaw took over a 12-1 team from harbaugh. Their comparative records isnt telling.

 

[SJGoalie32]

Coaching certainly matters, it is just that the players matter too (of course!). I guess I have a certain view of how much of each facet a coach is responsible for, and how much is on the players. The coach can lead the horse to water, but he can't make it drink!

Exactly. You can tell a Joe Thornton to shoot more, but you can't make him actually do it.

 

[Limekiller]

Speaking of McLellan vs DeBoer, have you guys seen some of the comments from Blues fans about Hitchcock? They sound basically identical to us complaining about when McLellan would go into a complete defensive shell and try and sit on a lead, and it frustrates them as much as we used to be. Honestly, even if DeBoer made no other changes than how the team approaches the 3rd period, I'd still be singing his praises over McLellan.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

http://www.gacklereport.com/feature/sharks-burns-silences-critics-norris-trophy-nomination/

There's a little bit of talk about the difference between Boughner and Jim Johnson near the end.

I think Burns comments mirror my feeling of DeBoer (and staff) being more of a unifying force....

Throughout the season, Burns has commended DeBoer’s coaching staff for bringing a positive vibe to the rink. His previous defensive coach, Jim Johnson, earned a reputation for being more of a drill sergeant, which may have hurt the blue liner’s confidence last season.

“A lot of it’s mindset stuff by the coaching staff, confidence,†Burns said, when asked about his turnaround this season.