Yzerman Season-Ending Press Conference

[Mlotek]

I'm assuming Blashil makes more than 300k? I always wondered how much his salary was.

He was making 800k per year on his previous deal.

So that would be your minimum.

https://www.capfriendly.com/staff/jeff-blashill

 

[TCNorthstars]

While I agree with Yzerman that a bad roster makes judging a coach's record a much harder task, the problem I have with bringing back Blashill is it sends a message that being record level bad isn't a big deal and it really shouldn't be treated so lightly. Our team is bad, that said, this is the NHL and the parity is such that the worst team in the league should never be 15+ pts behind 2nd, 3rd, 4th last etc. We were 23 pts behind the 30th place Ottawa Senators who are also horrendous. Clearly Blash is not good at getting compete level on a consistent basis. Losing is one thing, competing pretty much every night is a another. Also, that a losing coach is now 3rd longest tenured in the league is another reason why he should have got axed, and having watched hockey for 30+ years, I can't remember a single other coach that got this amount of runway, and there have been plenty of horrendous rosters and teams over the years, both before and after cap. I don't recall any going into a 6th year with a team after posting 4 straight losing seasons, one of which was record level bad. Even in 85-86 our last super horrible year, we replaced the coach at season's end. If this past season had been Blashill's 2nd season than I would say ok, I can see giving him a chance, but he was more than used up his welcome.

I've always wondered why lack of consistent compete level is often blamed on the coach. Why would a player at the highest level of the sport not give consistent compete and need the coach to motivate him? All I see there is a guy just trying to get a handsome paycheck and not striving to be the best.

 

[Mlotek]

I've always wondered why lack of consistent compete level is often blamed on the coach. Why would a player at the highest level of the sport not give consistent compete and need the coach to motivate him? All I see there is a guy just trying to get a handsome paycheck and not striving to be the best.

Because players are human and complacency is real regardless of your level. Not to mention the numerous distractions on/off ice.

That is literally the job of the coach to keep the players motivated.

Scotty was a master of it.


If coaches weren't responsible for motivating players they wouldn't waste their team with team talks before/during game.



I can't find the complete opposite approach of Blashill that FSD showed near end of 2019 season.

 

[Mlotek]

Example of players talking about Scotty.

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

US Gen. George Patton to his troops: "Fatigue makes cowards of us all". WWII

leaders motivate.

 

[Retire91]

Having a historically bad season is the result of going for the playoffs with stop gaps too many seasons in a row when your team was already past its expiration date. When talent arrives on the team the record will get better. If there are coaching issues at that time that will be the time to discuss coaching.

Keeping Blash does not send the message loosing is okay. Keeping Blash sends the message that loosing was inevitable just like it will be next season with any coach.

 

[vladdy16]

Because players are human and complacency is real regardless of your level. Not to mention the numerous distractions on/off ice.

That is literally the job of the coach to keep the players motivated.

Yep, there is a practical element to it too. If you get clear and concise direction and parameters for your aims, you can more safely let loose on the throttle. Sometimes(most times?) uncertainty or bewilderment, or square peg round hole can look like a lack of effort from afar.

 

[Henkka]

Having a historically bad season is the result of going for the playoffs with stop gaps too many seasons in a row when your team was already past its expiration date.

Not really. Historically bad seasons won't have any connections for teams having long playoff streaks. It's just teams losing their Star players and replacing them with kids (potential Star players or not), and not wanting to win.

I don't see a big difference for our current team, if seasons like 2013, and 2014 would have been already tanking seasons. We drafted Top10 players from those drafts, no matter were we good or bad. Maybe we draft worse players than Larkin, Mantha and Bertuzzi, if tanking then.

It's a very lousy excuse I read from here year after year.

I could say that 8 years of misery (since 2013) could be as near as this current 4 years of misery (since Datsyuk was gone).

 

[Retire91]

If that is the case then there would be teams that stay on top forever and go on deep playoff runs every single year. The streaks would be 25 years without breaking a sweat. Playoff caliber teams fall off eventually because the league is designed to lift the teams out of the gutter. You need top 5 talent to build around to open up any meaningful cup window. Some teams make dynamite scouting or get lucky and find top 5 talent deep in the draft, red wings included. But you maximize your chances when you have an actual top 5. During a rebuild teams also shed their assets and bulk up on picks and prospects, that can't happen when you are going full speed to be on the bubble.

Prospects were mismanaged and draft picks were traded during holland's get in and anything can happen era. If the rebuild would have started after Lidstrom retired or maybe when Larkin showed up the landscape would look entirely different. Things like signing Alfredson, the Abby contract, the helm contract, trading the Daytsuk contract just to name a few wouldn't have happened.

They are directly correlated. At some point you need to change your focus and collect talent.