The Babcocalypse: Babcock to Toronto

[The Zetterberg Era]

meh, extremely small sample size, Olympic ice, Olympic rules. it's not apples to apples.

But it was conservative while playing hockey with the best roster any of us have seen in our lifetimes...

While not all of international hockey can be brought up as a like comparison, it certainly strengthened the argument that this is how Babcock would win games when given a choice and a dominant roster.

I would have expected more of the same with more physical punishment on NHL ice. I mean the guys he benched were Subban and MSL. Two guys that like to offensively ad-lib at the expense of their defense and team structure at time, I also don't think it was a mistake those guys saw the bench promptly for Team Canada.

 

[8snake]

No, he has favorites. Some guys who shouldn't have been where they were got some great IT, and others not so much.

Overall, it works out but to say he doesn't have a doghouse and that some guys spent more time in it? Come on.

Every coach has favorites. Blashill will have favorites. Did Babcock stick with Cleary too long? Yup. Did Scotty stick with Doug Brown too long? Yup. I have taken Babcock to task for several decisions over the years, but the man is the best coach in the league and one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game. Minimizing his impact or blaming him for certain guys being disgruntled or not progressing is pretty weak IMO.

 

[FlashyG]

I'm not in any way trying to criticize Babcock as a coach.

He's got his preferred style and regardless of the sample size, rink size or arena location etc. I do believe the Olympics provided a clear insight into what Babcock hockey is.

However, I also think he's a good enough coach to take what's given to him and make the best out of it.

When he first got to Detroit he didn't immediately try to force his ways onto the team. It took him the better part of a decade and an eroded talent level in the roster to fully implement his style.

All I was trying to say initially when this got sidetracked is that some of the guys who have struggled under Babcock might have struggled because they can't play within his defensive minded system. Its also possible that some of those guys just lack the ability to play at the NHL level, but considering they have never played under any other system in their careers, it would be nice to see what they could do in a more offensive minded structure before writing them off.

 

[Heaton]

But it was conservative while playing hockey with the best roster any of us have seen in our lifetimes...

While not all of international hockey can be brought up as a like comparison, it certainly strengthened the argument that this is how Babcock would win games when given a choice and a dominant roster.

I would have expected more of the same with more physical punishment on NHL ice. I mean the guys he benched were Subban and MSL. Two guys that like to offensively ad-lib at the expense of their defense and team structure at time, I also don't think it was a mistake those guys saw the bench promptly for Team Canada.

And maybe that is why it worked. If the greatest hockey minds in Canada all bought in and it worked out, maybe that's the best way?

 

[8snake]

The primary point remains HOW they won. It's a rare case where we get to see what a coach does when he has a dream team.

People say Babcock coaches conservatively because the Wings roster has to do that to win. There's a lot of truth to that statement. I agree with that. But we've also seen Babcock, in very recent history, with one of the greatest rosters to ever play and they were coached to be a shell team that counter punches on turnovers.

Boy, that sounds familiar to what we saw in Detroit.

When was this...because I didn't see a conservative team during our Cup runs at all. You know what else...I have statistics and actual games you can watch yourself that shows the kind of style and pace they played at along with the league leading offensive numbers they put up.

 

[Winger98]

I think.who babs is and the clout he carries influences holland to do things he may otherwise not do

I think with blash, holland will feel less if not no pressure to deviate from his own plan

It might also free Holland to go out and get a guy who he may not have pursued as aggressively with Babcock behind the bench. How many guys has Holland brought in lately that Babcock has buried for one reason or another? I can imagine the list of guys they agreed on wasn't very long.

 

[Heaton]

I'm not in any way trying to criticize Babcock as a coach.

He's got his preferred style and regardless of the sample size, rink size or arena location etc. I do believe the Olympics provided a clear insight into what Babcock hockey is.

However, I also think he's a good enough coach to take what's given to him and make the best out of it.

When he first got to Detroit he didn't immediately try to force his ways onto the team. It took him the better part of a decade and an eroded talent level in the roster to fully implement his style.

All I was trying to say initially when this got sidetracked is that some of the guys who have struggled under Babcock might have struggled because they can't play within his defensive minded system. Its also possible that some of those guys just lack the ability to play at the NHL level, but considering they have never played under any other system in their careers, it would be nice to see what they could do in a more offensive minded structure before writing them off.

I'm all for Babcock moving on. But I'm not on board with blaming him for everything that has gone wrong in Detroit while he's been here like some (not you) are alluding to.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

And maybe that is why it worked. If the greatest hockey minds in Canada all bought in and it worked out, maybe that's the best way?

Does that work for us though, it hasn't been lately...

I don't think Babcock is a bad coach at all, I don't think he is the right coach for the Detroit Red Wings anymore.

 

[Bench]

All I was trying to say initially when this got sidetracked is that some of the guys who have struggled under Babcock might have struggled because they can't play within his defensive minded system. Its also possible that some of those guys just lack the ability to play at the NHL level, but considering they have never played under any other system in their careers, it would be nice to see what they could do in a more offensive minded structure before writing them off.

On the flip side of this, with Babcock leaving, I'd be more hesitant to bring in a guy like Dion Phaneuf. I actually think Babcock is exactly the coach that guy needs to bring his game to the next level. Babcock's pedigree and authority would force Phaneuf to heed changes and create a more responsible player.

Also, without Babcock, does Luke Glendening become one of the better 4th line centers in the league? He certainly looked that way in the playoffs, didn't he?

 

[Heaton]

Does that work for us though, it hasn't been lately...

I don't think Babcock is a bad coach at all, I don't think he is the right coach for the Detroit Red Wings anymore.

We don't have enough talent, the system is irrelevant. A gamelan deployed to win a two week tournament isn't relevant to a gamelan for an 82 game season.

 

[Heaton]

On the flip side of this, with Babcock leaving, I'd be more hesitant to bring in a guy like Dion Phaneuf. I actually think Babcock is exactly the coach that guy needs to bring his game to the next level. Babcock's pedigree and authority would force Phaneuf to heed changes and create a more responsible player.

Also, without Babcock, does Luke Glendening become one of the better 4th line centers in the league? He certainly looked that way in the playoffs, didn't he?

does Abdelkader become who he is? there's definitely another side to the coin.

 

[Bench]

When was this...because I didn't see a conservative team during our Cup runs at all. You know what else...I have statistics and actual games you can watch yourself that shows the kind of style and pace they played at along with the league leading offensive numbers they put up.

Yes, this was true seven years ago with one of the most dominant Cup teams in the last 20 years. Those were the days.

 

[Winger98]

When he first got to Detroit he didn't immediately try to force his ways onto the team. It took him the better part of a decade and an eroded talent level in the roster to fully implement his style.

I'm not sure that's true. I'm not going to go digging for the article, but I know there was at least one reported instance of Holland taking Babcock aside early in his tenure and basically telling him he needed to put more trust in the "Wings way" or skill and puck possession.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I'm all for Babcock moving on. But I'm not on board with blaming him for everything that has gone wrong in Detroit while he's been here like some (not you) are alluding to.

He isn't solely to blame, but he hasn't drastically overachieved either in my opinion as several are alluding to. He took the rosters outside of two years ago with all the injuries to about exactly where they were expected to go, sometimes better other times worse. He had the talent to win some of those series and he and the players didn't get the job done.

He doesn't have the same level of talent, but it doesn't really excuse a guy with a 3-1 or 3-2 lead blowing that either. We can blame the players that is fine, but then he isn't worth five million a year either. Does he truly get the best out of the group and is his message being received? Regardless of Babcock being back or not, I think change is coming I have stated that all year. That seems to be the direction Holland is moving in, too slow for some, but he seems to be gearing up for something. You can argue it isn't good enough that is fine. I have been a little disappointed, but there is no heir-apparent in Detroit for him and he has a better resume than even Saint Babcock if you want to come guns blazing on him. All share some blame here lately, but Babcock is one of the easier changes. Fix the defense and move forward with a more aggressive neutral zone system that attacks more.

We will see what happens, but if Babcock is the bees-knees, he hasn't been good enough either... It cannot fall on just one guy, which part of the system is easier to fix first, good coaches are easier to find than good upper management, that has been the case across sports for a while now. But it is clear you blame Holland for almost all of their troubles. I don't give Babcock a pass. Holland has work to do, if Babcock was to stay he also has work to do as his system and strategy is flat out not cutting it currently with what he is provided.

We need more out of the young guys next year to get where we want to go, agree with that assessment on locker clear out day. There needs to be answers on several fronts, moving on from Babcock won't kill this organization. He is a good/great coach, but he would need to adjust if he stays, just as we are demanding out of Holland and the players, he doesn't get a pass for this period either.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The primary point remains HOW they won. It's a rare case where we get to see what a coach does when he has a dream team.

People say Babcock coaches conservatively because the Wings roster has to do that to win. There's a lot of truth to that statement. I agree with that. But we've also seen Babcock, in very recent history, with one of the greatest rosters to ever play and they were coached to be a shell team that counter punches on turnovers.

Boy, that sounds familiar to what we saw in Detroit.

That Team Canada was not a one-man show. It was massive project and failure was not an option. I doubt it was Babcock's vision of the perfect hockey, but it was the lowest-risk, highest win-potential type of hockey and supported by Stevie Y and all the rest.

 

[8snake]

Does that work for us though, it hasn't been lately...

I don't think Babcock is a bad coach at all, I don't think he is the right coach for the Detroit Red Wings anymore.

It doesn't work because the ROSTER isn't very good. If we played a heavily offensive minded style we wouldn't have made the playoffs, and if by some miracle we did and traded chances with Tampa we would have been destroyed in 4 straight games. We did not have the personnel to play the style you want, especially on defense. I don't know why some of this is so hard for you guys to understand. We can barely pass the puck up ice and yet this is somehow Babcock's fault for not having players lacking skill playing a skilled game.

 

[FlashyG]

I'm not sure that's true. I'm not going to go digging for the article, but I know there was at least one reported instance of Holland taking Babcock aside early in his tenure and basically telling him he needed to put more trust in the "Wings way" or skill and puck possession.

That's possibly true, I have no idea why or how, but for several years they stuck to the system that worked for them in the late 90's and early 00's. Who knows if that is because Babcock took Hollands advice, because Holland forced him to, or because the players themselves wouldn't change styles.

It was only after losing to Pittsburgh that it seemed our style of play got more defensive. Whether that was Babcock getting the team to play his style or Babcock adapting to an eroding roster we'll never know for sure.

 

[Heaton]

We'll see how good our upper management is then. Because if Babcock has underachieved, so has Holland. The GM hasn't upgraded the team since 2009. His best move is DD who chose Detroit. I'm not convinced it matters who the next coach is. I don't see any change coming from Holland. We'll continue to see the kids and hope one turns into a superstar. nothing will be proactive, that's not who Holland is.

 

[DanZ]

does Abdelkader become who he is? there's definitely another side to the coin.

I think he's good at developing those hard-nosed, physical players like Glendenning and Abdelkader, but I don't necessarily think he's the best at developing the skill players like Nyquist, Tatar, Filppula, Hudler, etc...

 

[TheRatPoisoner]

What makes Babcock so good, in my opinion, is that he makes players buy what he's selling. He's an outstanding motivator (he even does motivational speaking for CEOs, if I recall correctly).

He's had a lot of great teams fall into his lap, yeah. 08 wings should have won the cup, 2010/2014 canadian olympic team should have won the gold medal, yeah I agree. In every case, it wouldn't have all come together but for the fact that players listen when Babs' speaks.

The most impressive thing that he did for me (and this is coming form a wings fan, so take it with a grain of salt) is putting the 2013-14 Wings in the playoffs without Dats or Z for long stretches. But for Babcock, the Wings don't make the playoffs that year in my opinion.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

It might also free Holland to go out and get a guy who he may not have pursued as aggressively with Babcock behind the bench. How many guys has Holland brought in lately that Babcock has buried for one reason or another? I can imagine the list of guys they agreed on wasn't very long.

I simply do not think.holland is either aggressive nor creative in his mgmt.style and with less pressure to evolve that style will.show more.

The phaneuf rumours.has babcock all over it, espescially if weiss and smith were part of it.

No babs likely ends those talks with holland perfering to keep weiss/smith for next.coach

No babs likely means a less aggressive pursuit of improving the blueline and rather a return to cheaper ufa options and internal competition(zidlicky and marchy/ouellet).

 

[Heaton]

I think he's good at developing those hard-nosed, physical players like Glendenning and Abdelkader, but I don't necessarily think he's the best at developing the skill players like Nyquist, Tatar, Filppula, Hudler, etc...

Nyquist has scored more goals in single seasons in Detroit than anywhere else in his professional career...

 

[8snake]

We'll see how good our upper management is then. Because if Babcock has underachieved, so has Holland. The GM hasn't upgraded the team since 2009. His best move is DD who chose Detroit. I'm not convinced it matters who the next coach is. I don't see any change coming from Holland. We'll continue to see the kids and hope one turns into a superstar. nothing will be proactive, that's not who Holland is.

I just hope the same posters clamoring for change stick to their stance when we miss the playoffs, because we will be fighting for our lives once again and hoping a 37 year old and a 35 year old stay healthy to gives ourselves a chance to sneak in.

 

[Winger98]

I simply do not think.holland is either aggressive nor creative in his mgmt.style and with less pressure to evolve that style will.show more.

The phaneuf rumours.has babcock all over it, espescially if weiss and smith were part of it.

No babs likely ends those talks with holland perfering to keep weiss/smith for next.coach

No babs likely means a less aggressive pursuit of improving the blueline and rather a return to cheaper ufa options and internal competition(zidlicky and marchy/ouellet).

The Phaneuf rumors definitely scream Babcock, but while we might not pursue Phaneuf as aggressively, we might go after someone else that Holland wouldn't have considered with Babcock behind the bench.

I think part of the lack of movement on Holland's part has come from friction between him and Babcock about the type of player/team they wanted to build. While Holland might retreat further into his shell, if there's a time for him to change a bit it's this and the next offseason as they shift gears a bit with a new coach. So I'm going to hold judgement on it until it plays out a bit.

 

[FlashyG]

I just hope the same posters clamoring for change stick to their stance when we miss the playoffs, because we will be fighting for our lives once again and hoping a 37 year old and a 35 year old stay healthy to gives ourselves a chance to sneak in.

So you're of the opinion that the only thing keeping the Wings in the playoffs is Babcock?