Hey everyone, I am curious, how would a person discern whether or not someone is actually a quality coach or not? I am asking this because when both Eakins and Tmac were hired, they talked the talk, and I initially enjoyed listening to them, until later on I recognized that they didn't understand how to get the job done...in my eyes they were salesmen without the substance.
Bit how does one discern a salesman type of coach to a coach with substance, a coach who really gets it?
It's a good question. Maybe someone else can answer that better, but I would say a bad coach does something like:
- has a PP that hasn't even worked as a joke for some six months
- has a brutal PK and doesn't even try to make real changes
- doesn't make obvious choices or changes
- doesn't get his team prepared for the beginning of games and periods
- uses his favourite players at the crucial moments and OT, despite them being unusable or having not scored for months
- has his clear favourites, and some players he benches or criticises much more easily than the others
- doesn't do line matching
- has obviously lost the room with several ungly losses in a row
- buries a top prospect to the bottom6 and doesn't utilize him at all or properly on the PP
- promises things in public but doesn't keep them (PP is a reward, better PP usage for a young prospect)
- doesn't really believe in timeouts
- hinders his best players production by the choice of wingers
- creates the lines terribly, using his favourites in the top6 roles despite the lack of results
So to me someone doing the opposite would be one heck of a coach.